[Peace] News notes for the AWARE meeting 2007-09-23

[C. G. Estabrook]

[I won't be able to deliver news notes to this afternoon's meeting, but 
here's what I think is the most important(and largely ignored) story of 
the week.  --CGE]

	Who Will Lead a Filibuster of the Iraq War Spending Bill?
	The Latest Betrayal by Senate Democrats
	By JOHN V. WALSH

The allegedly "antiwar" Senate Democrats betrayed the antiwar movement 
again last week, and the coming weeks will make Judas seem a model of 
loyalty by comparison. Prowar Senators used the filibuster provision 
repeatedly this past week to win the day, and the allegedly antiwar 
Senators did -- nothing . Friday, the Senate failed to get the votes 
necessary to stop a filibuster and vote on an amendment ordering most 
U.S. troops home from Iraq in the next nine months. The vote was 47-47, 
well short of the 60 required to bring debate to an end. On Thursday, 
the Senate blocked legislation by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid 
(D-Nev.) and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) that would have cut off 
funding, albeit only for "combat" forces in June 2008. Now comes the 
news that Bush's spending supplemental for the war to be submitted to 
the Senate this week will amount to nearly $200 billion dollars ($195 
billion to be precise, the price tag put on more or less the way done 
for a used car). Essentially Bush is thumbing his nose at the antiwar 
sentiment in the country, and the Dems are going along while trying to 
preserve a rapidly eroding antiwar veneer.

To get their way prowar Senators are on their way to using the 
filibuster provision a record number of times in this the 110th Congress 
where cloture has already been invoked 56 times at which rate there will 
be 143 such votes in this session! But the question must be raised, Why 
do the so-called "antiwar" Senators like Feingold or Obama or Kennedy or 
Kerry or Clinton or even Hagel not initiate a filibuster to stop Bush's 
supplemental funding requests for the war? Think about it for a moment. 
Yes it takes 60 votes to continue debate but by the same token it only 
takes 41 to terminate a debate -- and then the bill is dead. So why not 
filibuster Bush's forthcoming spending supplemental? Unless Bush can 
muster 60 Senate votes, his request is dead in the water. The bill is 
then a corpse and there is nothing to veto. Now the 47 Senators who 
voted Friday to bring the U.S. troops home from Iraq are more than 
enough to filibuster Bush's spending requests and end the war. Why do 
they not do it? Could it be that to a man and woman they are really 
prowar but this tactic allows them to appear antiwar to their 
constituents? Are they proclaiming their antiwar bona fides to the 
voters while demonstrating to their real masters in the military 
industrial complex and at AIPAC that they will do nothing to stop the 
war? That is the way it looks from here.

Second why is the media perfectly silent on this possibility. I defy 
anyone to find a single mention of the use of the filibuster to end the 
war now anywhere in the mainstream media. A good example is last 
Sunday's NYT piece by Frank Rich. He points out that the Dems are not 
doing enough to end the war, but then he laments that they really do not 
have the power. He perpetuates the myth that they have only a razor thin 
majority, a thought often put out by Harry Reid, and so they can do 
nothing. But Mr. Rich is surely smart enough to recognize that a 
filibuster can defund the war at once--and there are plenty of votes to 
do so among the 51 Dems.

Third and probably most important, why does the antiwar movement not 
take up the filibuster as a demand. It would bring enormous pressure to 
bear on Senatorial Dems who like to proclaim themselves antiwar. UFPJ 
(United for Peace and Justice) has explicitly refused to do this. Why? 
Because, according to the UFPJ "leadership," their friends on the Hill 
(read Dems) say it does not have a chance? Of course that could be said 
of any of the antiwar measures. No, the truth is that the filibuster and 
the vote that would follow in its wake would expose each and every Dem 
Senator for what they are. And that is a no-no for the UFPJ leadership 
which more or less shares a bed with the Dems.

There is one way to push this forward. At FilibusterForPeace.org there 
is a petition calling for a Senate filibuster against the war. Sign and 
circulate. And if you are a member of UFPJ or other peace group, get 
them to support this in an active way. There will be mighty resistance 
but it is still possible.

John V. Walsh can be reached at John.Endwar at gmail.com.