Republican obstructionists block Webb amendment

July 11, 2007

Of all the Democratic amendments to the Defense appropriations bill, the measure championed by Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) was the most obvious no-brainer. The amendment, which was co-sponsored by another decorated war hero, Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), didn’t have a direct impact on troop withdrawal or timelines, so it should have been easier for Republicans to support.

Webb’s measure focused on the multiple and extended deployments and rotations that have undermined U.S. readiness, and have strained the military to the breaking point. Webb/Hagel was quite simple: it requires every deployed soldier receive at least the same amount of rest when they return home. In other words, serve six months in Iraq, rest for six months back home.

“We have an amendment before us that is critical for the strength of our military and the well-being of our troops. Regardless of where we stand on the war, I would hope that we stand as one in our commitment to keeping our military the strongest in the world,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said before the vote. “We should all agree that we can’t sustain that strength if our men and women in uniform aren’t given the protection and care they need. That’s not a Democratic talking point or a Republican talking point — it’s just common sense.”

Well, it should be. As it turns out, most Senate Republicans not only opposed Webb/Hagel, they filibustered it so that it wouldn’t receive an up-or-down vote. This afternoon, Dems fell short of breaking the filibuster, 56 to 41, four votes shy of what they needed.

The roll-call list will be here fairly soon, but my friend Bob Geiger noted that seven Republicans broke ranks and supported the measure — Hagel, Coleman (Minn.), Collins (Maine), Smith (Ore.), Snowe (Maine), Sununu (N.H.), and Warner (Va.). (All but Snowe are up for reelection next year.) Lieberman, predictably, also voted against the troops.

And what of the other Republicans who’ve been talking about their heartfelt concern for the troops and the future of the war? Senators like Lugar, Domenici, and Alexander? They all voted against it. Indeed, they all voted to not even let the bipartisan measure come to the floor for an up-or-down vote.

Just yesterday, Lawrence Korb, Ronald Reagan’s assistant secretary of defense, explained the importance of the Webb amendment.

Regardless of whether a member supports a phased withdrawal of American forces from Iraq or continues to support President Bush’s latest escalation, he or she should support the Webb-Hagel amendment to the 2008 Defense Authorization Bill.

It takes two full years at home or after a one year deployment for a unit to become fully combat ready. Spending a year at home after a year in the combat zone is barely enough time to get themselves marginally ready physically and mentally for the next deployment. Giving them last time would mean sending units and individuals into battle who are not combat ready.

Members cannot vote against Webb-Hagel and claim they support the troops. Sending people back for another tour without the same amount of time at home as the length of their tour is wrong strategically and morally.

You can also read the talking points from the Senate Dem Caucus about how this amendment is — or was — important to addressing troops at their breaking point, the soldiers’ families, troop retention, military training, and National Guard responsiveness.

Right now, it’s just all too depressing. The next time you hear Republicans repeating nonsense about their “pro-military” attitude, remember how they voted this afternoon.

I feel so sad for the troops and their families. I hope the ones who have voted for Republicans get wind of this and think long and hard about their support for people who obviously do not care one bit if they spill their blood or not.

  • This should come as no surprise, since Bush and his Republican goon squad’s understanding of the military is limited at best. If you don’t know anything about it beyond flag-waving patriotic bullshit and follow-me-boys jingoism, it’s easy to forget it’s made up of people with the same or similar likes, dislikes, weaknesses and vulnerabilities as most of their countrymen. It’s easier to think of it as some faceless, all-consuming juggernaut against which nothing can stand for long.

    Reprehensible, but predictable.

  • I guess that old “up-or-down vote” thing died when the Dems reclaimed the majority.

    Forty-one Senators proved today that it is more important to support the president than it is to support the troops in the field. Good to know.

  • Did the republicans who fillibustered this bill give an explanation as to why they did so?

  • I think people who believe that it’s vital to send troops back in with inadequate rest should put their own children into the military to help with the effort–starting with the Bush twins on down. Recruitment efforts have fallen, apparently, because the true believers aren’t stepping up. Where is our wonderful corporate press in the markets where these so-called troop supporting leaders serve? Rethuglican heads should roll.

  • Now, now, we mustn’t “tie the President’s hands” when we’re just about to turn the corner so that we can see the light at the end of the tunnel.

    Who would want to be responsible for stopping the turnaround predicted in six more months…six more months…six more months…

  • I would also think this is a very important issue/factor regarding troop recruitment.

    Dems need to make sure that they point out, often, when countering a GOP/Lieberman claim of support for the troops, that the GOP and Lieberman had one very clean and clear shot to support the troops and their families, and that these disgraces chose to side against the troops and the american people.

  • Elected Republicans (in particular Senate Republicans) are it seems at this moment in our nation’s history morally bankrupt. -Kevo

  • What did these repukes say to defend their filibuster? I mean what rhetoric was used to justify not supporting the troops while claiming they support the troops? What a surprise the scum voted like scum.
    Once again the party of Hypocrisy brings more shame to our nation. The other repukes on board with this who are up for re-election are questionable based on their voting history.

  • Oh, the Big Corporate MSM is going to be all over this like white-on-rice.

    And if you believe that, I have some real estate for sale in a quiet neighborhood of Baghdad.

    The ReThugs have thrown off all restraint in their depraved indifference to the welfare of the troops. Some “support.” With “friends” like that, the troops don’t need enemies.

  • The Military Times family of papers and other media that have good access to military families need to get this information out loudly and clearly, and if they don’t the Dems need to find a way to do so – targeted mailings, perhaps. People need to understand that the Dems are trying to look out for the well-being of our troops, their families, their businesses, and their communities. Republicans see them as expendable cogs in the war machine. They might break? Fine, throw ’em away and find a new one.

    And reaching back a day or two to a prior subject – if there was ever a time to make the Rethugs actually filibuster, stand there and talk all night not just threaten and force a procedural vote, this was the issue.

  • Simple Solution ~

    Continue the debate and let the Republicans and Lieberman continue the fillibuster. By Friday it will be the lead story in the MSM and by next Friday the heat will be on big-time.

    Of course the Democrats won’t call their bluff. They’ll jus fold up and surrender.

  • Actually, while waiting for the vote count to be posted, I called McCain’s office to ask how he voted. Spoke to a staffer. Who told me he voted For cloture to limit debate. (roll call, later posted, says he voted “Nay” — When it comes to Senate rules and procedures, I’m confused. Don’t know if I was told wrong or if this is one of those no means yes things.)

    Further, staffer said that McCain would not have supported the Webb Amendment. Becasue it unnecessarily ties hands of operations there.

    Which statement confirmed by this , which includes a quote by McCain:

    Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the amendment would have created a “congressionally mandated fence around every service member.”

    “This certainly is without precedent,” McCain said. “I think it would be bad congressional micromanagement” and would have “immediate, adverse effects” on Iraq operations.

  • This is one of those legislative items which the Democrats need to keep bringing up, time after time. First, they need a P.R. campaign directed at showing the public that the Republicans do not support the troops. Then they need to introduce new legislation on the same theme, not necessarily as an amendment to another bill but even as a bill in its own right.

  • I had posted this on TP earlier:

    Troops at Odds With Ethics Standards
    Army Also Finds More Deployment Means More Mental Illness
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/04/AR2007050402151.html?hpid=topnews

    “The authors of the Army document argued that the strains placed on troops in Iraq are in some ways more severe than those borne by the combat forces of World War II. ‘A considerable number of Soldiers and Marines are conducting combat operations everyday of the week, 10-12 hours per day seven days a week for months on end,’ wrote Col. Carl Castro and Maj. Dennis McGurk, both psychologists. ‘At no time in our military history have Soldiers or Marines been required to serve on the front line in any war for a period of 6-7 months.’

    “And although U.S. casualties in Iraq are far lower than in the Vietnam War, for example, military experts say that Iraq can be a more stressful environment. In Vietnam, there were rear areas that were considered safe, but in Iraq there are no truly secure areas outside big bases. ‘The front in Iraq is any place not on a base camp’ or a forward operating base, the report noted.

    “The authors recommended that soldiers be given breathers during combat tours and intervals of 18 to 36 months between such tours, substantially longer than they are allowed now.”

    To the White House, America’s fighting men and women are simply expendable tools.

  • The 41 vampires sucking the blood out of our army should be treated like any other vampire: silver bullet and stake through the heart.

  • Lying, thieving, corrupt, incompetent Republicans are more than happy to support weapons systems and weapons-making companies, but are they willing to support the actual troops? – no, that’s too much for them.

  • Every time I think the GOP can no longer shock me, they prove me wrong. And then to say they had to vote no because they support the troops. WTF!!! These people are so ethically corrupt, the mafia wouldn’t even accept them. The Webb amendment should be brought up again and again, and the Dems should be holding press conferences 24/7 to let the people know what the Repukes are doing. On a side note – isn’t it amazing that our favorite non-candidate (Gore) chose “Lets start another war” Joe as a running mate? Question -Is Dick Cheney alive? I only ask because no one has seen him in sometime.

    • Comments are closed.