[Peace-discuss] Fwd: [Ufpj-disc] Re: [Ufpj-legislative] Let us debate the filibuster option as a policy- NOW.

[Morton K. Brussel]

John Walsh is trying to get enough Senators to filibuster the  
appropriations for the war, and asking UFPJ to put this high on their  
agenda. Below are some of his messages to UFPJ. I for one think his  
proposal is worth backing.  See what he says:

He says: "Almost everyone has an email address of hundreds and many  
of us have emails from thousands.  If we could get UFPJ, ANSWER,  
Peace Action and Council for A Livable World to promote it, that  
would be great.  Of course the Left, CounterPunch.com and the  
Libertarian Antiwar.com have both carried the pieces I have written  
on it.  I tried to get it into The Nation at least as a letter - but  
Katrina continues to wreak considerable damage (the editor, no the  
hurricane) there by placing  loyalty to the Dems above all else"

---mkb

Walsh's statement:

I would like UFPJ to discuss the filibuster option as the central
point of future legislative effort.  I wish to make a few points:

1.  There is essentially only one way to end the war in a veto-proof
way.  That is by filibustering to STOP funding in the Senate.  While
it takes 60 Senate votes to get something passed (or to cut off a
filibuster), it takes ONLY 41 votes OR abstentions to stop something.
       Right now a lot of effort is going into supporting legislative
measures that cannot work.  Why do that?

2.Yesterday the Republicans in the Senate used this filibuster opton
for the third time in the last 30 days.  (Although the "date certain"
measuer went down to defeat by 50 to 48, it was under one of the
filibuster rules where 60 votes were required to defeat it.)
Consider those 48 votes - that is seven more than needed to sustain a
filibuster.

3. The Senators will be under tremendous pressure to support such a
filibuster.  IMHO a senator who does not support the filibuster would
have trouble getting elected in 2008.

4. There is only ONE reason for failing to do this - again IMHO.  All
other legislative measures make the Republicans look bad without any
real demands on the Dems.  But the filibuster option puts the Dem
senators on the line.  They have to go beyond Bush bashing.  So
backing other legislative measures helps the Democrats at the expense
of peace.  On the other hand demanding a filibuster makes the
Democrats serve the peace movement.  It is our obligation to make the
latter come to pass.

5.We have collecting thousands of signatures on our petition at:
www.FilibusterForPeace.org
Please take a look and let's discuss it.
jw


Begin forwarded message:

> From: John Walsh <jvwalshmd at gmail.com>
> Date: March 16, 2007 11:46:51 AM CDT
> To: Bill Scheurer <wcscheurer at comcast.net>
> Cc: sue udry <sue at unitedforpeace.org>, legislative listserv ufpj  
> <ufpj-legislative at lists.mayfirst.org>, UFPJ- Discussion <ufpj- 
> disc at lists.mayfirst.org>
> Subject: [Ufpj-disc] Re: [Ufpj-legislative] Let us debate the  
> filibuster	option as a policy- NOW.
>
> **Please see footer for list protocol**
>
> So how do we do it?
> 1.  I have been gathering signatures.  Almost everyone has an email
> address of hundreds and many of us have emails from thousands.  If we
> could get UFPJ, ANSWER, Peace Action and Council for A Livable World
> to promote it, that would be great.  Of course the Left,
> CounterPunch.com and the Libertarian Antiwar.com have both carried the
> pieces I have written on it.  I tried to get it into The Nation at
> least as a letter - but Katrina continues to wreak considerable damage
> (the editor, no the hurricane) there by placing  loyalty to the Dems
> above all else
> 2. One group in New Hampshire wrote that they will have a filibuster
> demand on their signs at an Obama event and try to get him to answer
> what he thinks about it.  (The standard answer (given by John Kerry's
> aides) is: "The votes are not there."  Our response is: "Is your vote
> there?  That is where we start.  We only want your vote and
> leadership; then we will get the rest."
> (I must note that Kennedy's aide did not respond the way Kerry's did.
> His response was that he would give it to the Senator and he clearly
> showed interest in it.  We do have a few real friends.)
>
> 3. At what point can we make this come into public view in the mass
> media.  Bird Dogging Hillary would help.
>
> 4. Other ideas?
>
> jw

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20070317/e49c520d/attachment.html