Rep. Barbara Lee [D-CA9], proved she has a backbone when in 2001 she stood up against war and became the only member of congress to vote "No" on the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF), and she was oh so right.
Now, Barbara has again taken the lead in trying to stop the insane decision to expand and escalate the war in Afghanistan. Her bill, H.R. 3699 "To prohibit any increase in the number of members of the United States Armed Forces serving in Afghanistan," has been referred to the House Armed Services Committee. Link: http://www.govtrack.us/congres... Cosponsors:
Yvette Clarke [D-NY11] Emanuel Cleaver [D-MO5] Steve Cohen [D-TN9]
John Conyers [D-MI14] Donna Edwards [D-MD4] Keith Ellison [D-MN5]
Bob Filner [D-CA51] Alan Grayson [D-FL8] Raul Grijalva [D-AZ7]
Maurice Hinchey [D-NY22] Michael Honda [D-CA15] Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX18] Dennis Kucinich [D-OH10] John Lewis [D-GA5] James McDermott [D-WA7]
James McGovern [D-MA3] Jerrold Nadler [D-NY8] Fortney Stark [D-CA13] Edolphus Towns [D-NY10] Nydia Velázquez [D-NY12]Maxine Waters [D-CA35]
Diane Watson [D-CA33] Lynn Woolsey [D-CA6]
As you can see, MOST of our 53 California representatives have NOT signed onto the bill. No Waxman. No Berman. No Sherman. No Schiff. Just those heroes in bold above are on this short list. CONTACT your representative to ask that they co-sponsor and support this important legislation to take back the war powers as in our constitution. And thank those who have signed on.
Here's the link to the committee: http://www.govtrack.us/congres... The Democratic Chair is Rep. Ike Skelton [D-MO4] with the ranking Republican member Rep. Howard McKeon [R-CA25] (Santa Clarita and east), Rep. Duncan Hunter [R-CA52], and the TWO DEMOCRATS from CA:
Rep. Susan Davis [D-CA53] (San Diego) and Rep. Loretta Sanchez [D-CA47] (Garden Grove-Santa Ana).
Please CONTACT these people on the committee right away and ask that this bill be brought to a vote immediately. With the impending announcement coming from Obama, there is no time to lose.////
Here's an email I received recently from a person who refused to help American Combat Veterans of War because a few Democratic politicians were listed on our website as supporters, even though just as many Republicans support our mission as Democrats. For background, ACVOW is a San Diego based nonprofit that recruits combat veteran volunteers to mentor our young warriors, helping them cope with combat stress. ACVOW's response follows. It's a bit lengthy, but I hope you read it.
Dear Sir;
Yesterday, outside of a Stater Bros. store a gentleman from your organization was soliciting signatures for a ballot. This is not a problem, and your program is probably worthwhile. However, the persons endorsing your program, in my opinion, are a not good representatives to promote your cause. If Bob Filner & Susan Davis lent their support or name to any organization I would never contribute any amount of money. I would not ask any friends or relatives to contribute either because Filner and Davis, in my opinion, are disasterous for San Diego and CA. When I saw their names I knew immediately that I would not contribute. There are others that believe differently, but I do know that there are many who also believe as I do.
Regards,
Libby
Libby:
Yes, I remember speaking with you and frankly, I apologize for losing my demeanor. It was unprofessional for me to do so. Frustrated with the ease at which many people dismiss our young warriors with a wave of their hand, I had lost my patience when you suggested American Combat Veterans of War was not a legitimate organization simply from our support by certain public officials.
Under the surface of our great young warriors lurks an enemy for which many lack the training to fight. Having served our country on the battlefield, they are rewarded with an economy that has little room for them and trauma that continues to haunt. The combat veteran volunteers of ACVOW have been mentoring and healing our young warriors suffering from combat stress since 2001. Our presence at supermarkets is to remind our community of the sacrifices our troops continue to make for our country on and off the battlefield. If I have spoiled anyone's shopping experience by asking for a signature, be certain that I lose no sleep over it.
As the news comes in on the indictment of Series of Tubes Ted Stevens, it's instructive to take a look back at who the Yacht Party in California allows to speak for them as "leaders". First we have Sheriff Michael Carona, "America's Sheriff," who is apparently more than just a run-of-the-mill corrupt public official, but actually deeply vulgar, venal and unethical, even by the standards of the GOP - but also weirdly representative of a certain level of corruption in the OC.
His attorneys are asking a federal judge to prevent a future jury from hearing secretly recorded tapes of Carona snarling racial epithets, referring vulgarly to women and boasting of both sexual and political prowess.
"I mean, I've met millionaires, billionaires, and I've traveled on personal airplanes . . . drank great wine and, you know, had great booze and had some, you know, phenomenal [sex] along the way," Carona told his longtime patron, an auto auction magnate who was wearing a wire. "I'm the most lethal [expletive] in politics in Orange County."
The revelations have disappointed but not quite shocked Orange County, where the sensibility enshrined at Anaheim's Disneyland long has informed local politics, as well. Each invests heavily in an idealized, lavishly financed and fervently polished vision of Americana that few appear to accept as entirely real in the first place [...]
Before Carona's public disgrace, a superior court judge last year was sentenced to 27 months for possession of child pornography. The founder of the Trinity Broadcasting Network, located behind white wrought-iron curlicues in Costa Mesa, paid $425,000 to suppress an account of an alleged homosexual encounter. The Orange County Register reported that the Justice Department is investigating the county treasurer for allegedly diverting funds from a bankrupt trucking company to pay for Botox.
(the party affiliations of these officials have been strangely expunged. Thanks Washington Post!)
And this behavior is not limited to Orange County (flip it)...
They're not two of my favorite California Congresswoman. But their leadership on repealing don't ask don't tell comes to a head with a hearing today, chaired by Davis.
Democrats in Congress hope to ignite a drive to reverse the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy Wednesday with the first hearing on the subject since 1993, when President Clinton said gays could serve in uniform if they kept quiet about their sexual orientation.
Without this hearing, said former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman John Shalikashvili, "you will never repeal the law. It's a great idea." He is among more than 50 retired generals and admirals who have said it is time to rethink the policy [...]
Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee tried to have a hearing on the policy in April 2007, but opposition from conservatives in their party sank the idea.
Since then, "There's another year in the war," says Rep. Susan Davis, a California Democrat who chairs the military personnel subcommittee. "We want to start a conversation" that could put the issue on a front burner again.
Democratic Rep. Ellen Tauscher of California, the lead sponsor of a bill to repeal the policy, said she knows what military leaders would say if they testified.
"The military leadership will tell you that this is the law they've been given to operate under and that's what they do," she says, "which is a very different question of off-line and off-the-record, 'Personally, admiral, what do you think?' That's the only way they could answer ... differently."
The Pentagon may be ducking this hearing, but they can't hide from public opinion. Over 75 percent of Americans would like to see DADT repealed. The arguments about "unit cohesion" have been shown to be ridiculous, and the case of Arabic translators being fired for being gay have highlighted not only the absurdity of this policy, but the national security harm it's actually doing.
The most fitting part of all of this is that Larry Craig supports Don't Ask Don't Tell. Yeah, he would, wouldn't he? I'm sure he'd love to change the title to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Just Tap Three Times," but then...
UPDATE: Rep. Patrick Murphy (from my hometown) had a great hearing. He kicked a little butt today. Video on the flip:
[cross-posted from dailykos]
Yesterday Mike Copass and incumbent Susan Davis participated in a debate hosted by Common Cause and the League of Women Voters. They are candidates for the Congressional seat in the 53rd district of California, my district. The hour-long event at the Joyce Beers Center was very well attended - standing room only - and it was a great debate.
I didn't take notes - and I should have - but below the fold are the points I can remember.
I have been holding off writing to Susan Davis, my local superdelegate, but after what Hillary Clinton said yesterday, I finally had to let it out. Here is the text of my letter to Rep. Davis:
May 24, 2008
Susan Davis for Congress
PO Box 84049
San Diego, CA 92138 Via Facsimile
Re: Superdelagate Endorsement
Dear Congresswoman Davis:
I write to you as my member of Congress and as a superdelegate to the Democratic National Convention. I strongly suggest that you endorse a candidate for President of the United States now.
It is my understanding that there are three positions that you and the other superdelegates have taken in this election: those who have endorsed a candidate; those who have declared their intention to vote for the winner of the most pledged delegates; and those who have made no endorsement. It appears you fall into the third group.
Recent developments in the presidential campaign have, in my view, made it absolutely necessary that you and the other superdelegates declare your intention as soon as possible. Specifically, Senator Clinton's remarks about her staying in the race, juxtaposed with a reference to the assassination of Robert Kennedy in 1968, are simply beyond the level of decency I expect from a Democratic candidate. Further, any attempt on her part to explain them as a mistake are unconvincing to say the least; as she has made such a comment on at least one other occasion in March to a Time magazine editor.
I want to say that I will respect your decision as to whom you will support; the party rules have reposed such discretion in you and your conscience, and I will leave it to you to exercise such discretion whether or not I agree with you. However, the Democratic Party can no longer wait and watch as this internecine battle winds down. In order for Senator Clinton to win the pledged delegates, she would have to win well over 100% of those delegates to be awarded in the remaining primary contests and caucuses.
I have supported you in Congress since you got there, but I feel that I am witness to a disturbing lack of alacrity on your part for both your Congressional and political duties. I have been rather unimpressed with your legislative accomplishments with regard to the core duties and powers of Congress as set forth in Article I of the U.S. Constitution. Let me point out, for example, that you were on the Veterans' Subcommittee for years while conditions deteriorated at Walter Reed and other VA hospitals, yet I am unaware of any statement from you regarding those conditions until they became public in late 2006. Walter Reed Hospital is only a short distance from Capitol Hill. Based on the conditions I saw in the news, they should have been obvious to anyone who had visited the place. I would think that you even more than others, being that your husband was a military physician, would have made an effort to visit that hospital.
Further, I note that going into the second primary election this year, you do not have a functioning campaign website. The page asks viewers to "bear with you" while it is being updated. I must ask: what is the holdup?
This is a disturbing trend. Now, as the Democratic Party needs unity, and Senator Clinton seems bent on destroying it, you again "sit on the sidelines."
It is time for the party to begin to move on to the general election. John McCain is being given a "free ride" to do as he pleases, in spite of his daily gaffes, flip-flops, and shockingly bad positions, such as his cowardly abdication of any leadership on the new G.I. Bill. He says he opposes the Webb bill, but would rather be fundraising rather than vote either for or against it. The Democrats simply cannot let him get away with it any longer.
I urge you to do the simplest of things, even though it will take courage. Please publically endorse a presidential candidate now.
Woohoo! Jerry did it! Jerry McNerney has managed to become the most un-progressive Democrat of the entire California congressional delegation. For those keeping score at home, Jerry's 82.45 was about a half point lower than the next CA Dem, Jim Costa, that progressive stalwart, at 82.97. And for all the talk of Harman changing her ways, she's still worse than even Joe Baca, almost 7 points worse from a very safe Dem seat.
For all of you CA-45 fans, "moderate" Mary Bono came in with a stellar 4.42 Chips are Down score. So, for all the bluster of the SCHIP vote, she's still dancing the same jig as the rest of her party.
On thing must be said, the Speaker has done an excellent job at preserving unity amongst the caucus. Whether that means she's being too incremental and/or ineffective, or just laying down the law is the big question. The reason her approval rating, and the Congress in general, is down has a whole lot to do with the fact that little has changed on the Iraq front. So, would it be better to have a speaker who is more willing to take risks? Perhaps, but the impediment of the president always lingers over her head, veto pen in hand. So, whether the unity is really there, is an open question. Full data over the flip.
(I was working on a similar post, but I'll still post my own, with all CA data and some other miscellany. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
The problem with most scorecards is that they are written by lobbyists concerned with always getting the votes of potential supporters. Thus, there is an equal weighting while in the real world not all votes are equal. In fact, regardless of everything else, some votes are dealbreakers and when they show up on scorecards as one of 12 votes or something, it looks silly. However, Progressive Punch has a new "when the chips are down" scorecard. After the flip is the ratings of CA's congressional delegation, in descending order.
I'm guessing that at tonight's Calitics' Actblue Celebrations there will be a lot of discussion about the votes to condemn MoveOn. The CA delegation split 50-50 in the senate and 16 yea and 17 nay in the house -- wedged successfully by the GOP in half. After the flip is the scorecard.
(worth being frontpaged. Also, Jerry McNerney, Jane Harman, Adam Schiff, Lucille Roybal-Allard, Jim Costa, Laura Richardson, Joe Baca, Loretta Sanchez, Mike Thompson, Tom Lantos, Dennis Cardoza, Anna Eshoo, Sam Farr, Ellen Tauscher, and Grace Napolitano voted to tell the progressive movement to STFU. So replace Davis' name with any of them. - promoted by David Dayen)
In a direct slap in the face to anyone who's ever felt that free speech or the right to protest the government are, you know, Constitutional imperatives, Susan Davis voted today to condemn the Petraeus/Betray us MoveOn ad. That's what your congress is doing. Not ending a war. Not passing a law that will make people healthier, wealthier, wiser, or safer. Spitting on free speech. Thank you to Bob Filner and the 79 Democrats who stood with him for getting this vote right, and no thanks to the 195 Republicans and the 145 other Democrats in the House who joined Susan Davis in telling the nation to sit down, shut up, and leave governance to the grownups without passionate public input. If you think MoveOn was disrespectful to the troops by running an ad in the New York Times Ms. Davis, where exactly does paying for the troops to get shot at rank?
It's time to get angry. Congress is telling people what they're supposed to say and not say. I don't remember learning about that congressional duty in government class.
Brad Blog was all over it yesterday as Susan Davis (CA-53) sought to add an amendment to Rush Holt's Election Reform Bill that would ban all DRE (Direct Recording Electronic) voting machines. The bill finished the day still in committee, so feel free to make some calls today urging support of the amendment. Target members of the Rules Committee to make sure it gets attached, and (to echo the call from BradBlog) let your own representative know they should insist on a DRE ban before voting for the bill. BradBlog also notes that the amendment has been endorsed by MoveOn, Verified Voting and VoteTrustUSA.
Davis' office told BradBlog that the amendment was relying on Leadership and the Rules Committee allowing it. I think you've all met Nancy Pelosi already, you know where to find her. Louise Slaughter chairs the committee, and California members are Democrats Doris Matsui and Dennis Cardoza, and Republican David Dreier who serves as the ranking minority member of the committee. Leverage galore Californians.
Well, we have a new problem. One of our own Senators, Dianne Feinstein, is undecided on adding something like the Davis Amendment to the Senate's Defense Authorization Bill. I guess she's not sure yet whether California state environmental law is important enough to be enforced. Follow me after the flip to find out what YOU can do to ensure that Senator Feinstein votes to enforce the law, protect our coast, and respect the integrity of our parks...
As noted by me first here and then here last night, I'm very disappointed in Susan Davis' vote yesterday. She has a strong record of opposition to this war, which makes this vote all the more frustrating. I'd be much more willing to work on moving forward if it weren't for her justification of her vote:
WASHINGTON - Congresswoman Susan Davis released the following statement on her vote to continue funding current operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for the coming few months.
"As someone who voted against going to war and supported a timeline for bringing home the troops, there is no doubt in my mind that we must end this war. The reality is opposing this bill would not end the war.
"Cutting off war funding today will not only impact the troops in the field, many of whom are from San Diego, but will also impact military families at home as President Bush would take funding from other sources to fund his war.
"I look forward to supporting measures that will end the war and will not put our troops at risk."
I'm sorry Rep. Davis, but I do not accept your premise. I do not accept the notion that this bill would leave troops undersupplied because 1. they already are, 2. there's a lot of money in the Defense budget already and 3. this isn't the last bill you can send to the President.
But most of all, I don't accept the fundamental defeatism here. Susan Davis has just said, in so many words, that no matter what Congress does, Bush cannot be stopped. She has just conceded the complete impotence of Congress. Well you know what? Do your job. The President's approval rating is reaching all-time lows, 76% of the country thinks the war is at least going "somewhat badly" and Americans keep dying faster and faster in Iraq. Do your job.
I'll keep it short and sweet tonight. Nice votes from a bunch of California Dems, but tonight I'm more than a little sick over Susan Davis. And so, as the capitulation goes forth in all its glory, I'm just not in a happy place and, at least tonight, I'm not feeling particularly patriotic. Brother Ali - Uncle Sam Goddamn.
Imported and tortured the work force
They never healed the wounds or shook the curse off
Now the grown up goliath nation
Holdin open auditions for the part of david, can you feel?
Nothing can save you, you question the rain
You get rushed in and chained up
fists raised but I must be insane
Cause I cant figure a single goddamn way to change it
({This is Part 9 of my special report on the proposed extension of the 241 Toll Road to San Onofre State Beach (aka Trestles). If you'd like, you can find the other stories in the "Speeding Our Way to Trestles" series here. As the debate heats up over Trestles and the 241, I'd like to go in depth and examine all the issues involved... And I'd love for you to come along for the ride as we explore what can be done to relieve traffic in South Orange County AND Save Trestles Beach. Enjoy! : ) } - promoted by atdleft)
A proposed toll road through parkland that has become Orange County's most explosive environmental controversy could be jeopardized - and perhaps even killed - if a small amendment added to a defense authorization bill is approved today.
The Foothill South toll road, which would bisect San Onofre State Beach park and cut through highly sensitive natural habitat, has pitted environmental activists against residents who say the road is vital to prevent south county gridlock as populations rise.
Rep. Susan Davis, D-San Diego, who is sponsoring the amendment, believes she has the votes to repeal a 1999 law that authorized the military to grant the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency the right to build a road on 340 acres of parkland.
Authorization from the Navy is necessary before the toll road, which must clear a variety of other regulatory hurdles, can be built.
So can this mean the end of Foothill-South? Follow me after the flip for more...
