Connecting You to Your Community
Lodi, California •

Indexes

February 9th, 2010
February 8th, 2010
February 6th, 2010
February 5th, 2010
February 4th, 2010
February 3rd, 2010
February 2nd, 2010
ADVERTISEMENT

Area congressmen split on Iraq vote


Saturday, March 24, 2007 8:57 AM PDT

Jerry McNerney, D-Pleasanton, Lodi's congressman, voted in favor of the House bill which pushes for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq in late 2008, while Galt's representative, Dan Lungren, R-Gold River, opposed the measure.

Related stories:
Comparing House and Senate Iraq bills
Democrats: Bill reflects voters' demands

McNerney released a statement Friday, but Lungren made his opinion clear in a letter sent to his district earlier in the week. The following are excerpts from both statements:

Congressman Jerry McNerney

"The Iraq war has now carried on for more than four years. While there have been moments of hope in Iraq, they have been overshadowed by a deteriorating situation and an increase in violence and chaos.


Jerry McNerney

Our troops have performed admirably. But now, our men and women in uniform find themselves amidst a religious civil war. If they stay, they will continue to oversee the killing. Many American troops will be wounded or killed in the process. However, if our troops pull out too quickly, chaos and violence will surely follow, perhaps engulfing neighboring states.

I believe our plan is the most responsible course we can take. It moves our efforts in a new direction that protects our troops and honors our veterans. It uses the leverage we have available to make Iraqis responsible for Iraq, and it refocuses efforts on Afghanistan and the war on the terror.

Our plan was developed only after discussions with military and foreign policy experts, and considering the Iraq Study Group Report's recommendations, the Pentagon's standards on combat readiness, and the growing needs of returning veterans and their families.

Our plan establishes responsible benchmarks and a reasonable redeployment timeline over 12 to 18 months — which I have consistently called for.

The plan ensures that our veterans and their families are treated with the respect they've earned when they return home, by increasing funding for veterans' health care — including specifically addressing post traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injuries, the hallmark injuries of this conflict.

It is time for a new direction in Iraq. This reasoned plan accomplishes just that."

Congressman Dan Lungren

"I have to say, this is both cynical and unconstitutional.

First, it sends a wrong message to our troops in the field. It tells them that despite the fact that General Petraeus, our new military commander on the ground in Iraq, was unanimously confirmed by the United States Senate, those in Congress do not support his mission — a mission that he helped develop, a mission that he put his stamp on, a mission he has told our troops he believes can be victorious.


Dan Lungren

Second, it sends a message to the Iraqi people that they cannot trust our ability to continue in the tough fight so that we can transfer to them the responsibility for their own security.

Third, it sends a very direct message to the enemy, that in fact while we say we are implementing a new, targeted effort — the new tactics, new strategy that General Petraeus is in charge of — we do not believe it is actually going to work. It tells our enemies that if you just wait long enough, we are going to leave.

All of those things undercut the possibility that we can succeed in Iraq. The emergency supplemental is a cynical attempt by the Democratic leadership to spend taxpayers' money in order to influence votes that have nothing to do with the war. Such "pork" includes votes in the area of agriculture, votes in the area of funding for children's health, votes on the minimum wage, votes in miscellaneous funding. This was done solely to attract votes from people who otherwise might not vote for this because they do not believe we ought to have these restrictions.

This debate really comes down to whether we believe that Congress is better able to direct the war in Iraq than the generals of the armed forces on the ground.

And if we, the Congress, do believe that, then we had better change the Constitution."

Reader Feedback

T & C wrote on Mar 25, 2007 11:21 AM:

" Where are Bin Laden and the WMD's? I thought Pombo would find them in his failing terms. "

T & C wrote on Mar 24, 2007 10:21 PM:

" Probably got it from "Faux" news or Bill orally. Now that's fair and balanced the conservative way. Just ask Rush Limbaugh. "

R. Wayne wrote on Mar 24, 2007 6:32 PM:

" Insightful comments by Steward. However, they address no issues, only personal slander. The problem in Iraq is real and many Generals have supported the plan as did the Iraq study group which includes an equal number of Democrats and Republicans. This is not about victory or defeat, it is about finding a solution that will move this nation forward with integrity in the international struggle with terrorism. "

Steward wrote on Mar 24, 2007 9:59 AM:

" Well Jerry who else did you and the liberal Democrats receive your war info from, George Soros, Michael Moore, Sean Penn etc.?? How much of the extra $20 million worth of bribes did General Pelosi payout to change votes in favor of this doomed bill? Bet you could get a spiffy new hat with part of that hush money. "

Comments on this story are now closed.