414 Members Of Congress Go On The Record About Escalation
414 Members Of Congress Go On The Record About Escalation
ThinkProgress is keeping track of where every member of Congress stands on escalation. Using media reports, press releases, and submissions from hundreds of readers, we’ve compiled an interactive tally showing every member’s position. (Check it out HERE.)
But we still need your help. Dozens of officials have either said nothing publicly about escalation or are explicitly refusing to state their position. For instance, in Louisiana, both Rep. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) and Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) “declined to take a position” on Bush’s new policy. Rep. Nancy Boyda (D-KS) acknowledged “deep concerns” about escalation but “decline[d] to take a definitive position.” Other notable members of Congress — such as Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), the prime congressional advocate of the Iraq Study Group — appear to have made no public comment about Bush’s policy.
Call your members of Congress now and ask their position, then email their response to:
Also email us if you see press reports with your member of Congress quoted about escalation. You can reach the Capitol switchboard toll-free at 800-614-2803. Just provide your zip code or ask for your members of Congress by name.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
The paranoid’s view of falling oil prices driving escalation: With Iraq in total chaos and much of its oil off the market, there still seems to be way too much oil slopping around in world oil markets. What peak oil? Was the Iraq war really about keeping its oil in the ground? Even with all the chaos, there’s still way too much oil on the market. Hey, Iran has a lot of oil we could take off the market. What about finding a pretext to attack them? We could say it was to defend Iraq.
January 18th, 2007 at 12:40 pmKeep up the pressure on every member of Congress till they cut off funding for the Iraq fiasco and bring the troops home to their families!
January 18th, 2007 at 12:50 pmYou could also point out to your congress leaders that, according to the Borgen Project, it would only cost $19 billion anually until 2015 to eradicate world hunger. And that they agreed to the Millennium Development Goals in 2000, and need to keep their promise. We’ve spent over $300 billion in Iraq so far- what could that money have done to end world hunger?
January 18th, 2007 at 12:54 pmKatieL > actually the amount wasted on Iraq has passed the half trillion mark already. Bush under-reports the actual funds wasted for Iraq War, so the press is kept ignorant about it. The Iraq Study Group Report claims the war will cost 1 to 2 trillion eventually if it is not ended!
January 18th, 2007 at 1:01 pmHey, Dave Reichart (WA-8)
January 18th, 2007 at 1:07 pmYour district almost sent a Microsoft product manager (Darcy Burner) to Congress to replace you last year.
So sad that you don’t seem to be able to get the damn message.
As my good friend Bullwinkle J. Moose would say,
Next time for sure!
What’s the difference between “a surge”, “an escalation” and “an augmentation” when it comes to Iraq?
For the answer in pictures, see:
January 18th, 2007 at 1:11 pm“Understanding the White House’s Iraq Vocabulary.”
You have Murkowksi listed as being from Arkansas (AR) instead of Alaska (AK)
January 18th, 2007 at 1:12 pmJay and RU…this walk off is just for a day.
January 18th, 2007 at 1:17 pmwow. thats great. thanks
January 18th, 2007 at 1:17 pmJuan I notice, but Judd is trying to stop malicious troll posts.
January 18th, 2007 at 1:32 pm414 Members of Congress is not enough. We need all of these representatives to know that this is intolerable.
January 18th, 2007 at 1:42 pm#8 Juan…
January 18th, 2007 at 1:46 pmYeah, my off day will be tomorrow, or some other random day…
I’m feeling the need to vent today…!!!!
Jay,
The troll problem is very easy to correct, if TP wanted to. Hire somebody to moderate the forums or pick some people to handle that function who post here. We don’t want censorship, we want order. We want to be able to discuss topics and hear from both sides without being called traitors, terrorist sympathizers, anti-American or any other BS like that. As soon as a troll posts a comment like that, it should be deleted from the server.
It is clear to see when one of the resident trolls says something that is completely false and has no basis in reality, that they are trying to take the thread off topic, which is against the TOS.
I thought some of these nut jobs would go away after their whooping on November 7th, but they haven’t changed, which goes to show that they are either 1) crazy as a loon or 2) paid to disrupt our threads.
Either way, they shouldn’t be allowed to comment without adding to the conversation at hand.
January 18th, 2007 at 1:47 pmMe > I agree with you about troll crap posts being deleted. I think the problem is that some of the trolls keep changing their screen names and IP services to prevent being banned. It’s just a couple trolls on here making trouble and I do hope that Judd is able to weed them out.
January 18th, 2007 at 1:53 pmStop the escalation!
We want to lose the war and have Iraq end up like Cambodia did when we withdrew from the Vietnam war!
More death!
Yay!
January 18th, 2007 at 1:57 pmJuan I notice, but Judd is trying to stop malicious troll posts.
Comment by Jay Randal
Maybe he should pay the person that knocks down 911 posts to concentrate on the trolls instead… the 911 post destroyer seems to be much more successful.
January 18th, 2007 at 2:00 pm“Keep up the pressure on every member of Congress till they cut off funding for the Iraq fiasco and bring the troops home to their families!”
Yes Jay, get that white flag out of your closet. You probably need to dust it off as you probably haven’t had to use it since 1975!
January 18th, 2007 at 2:00 pm“We want to lose the war and have Iraq end up like Cambodia did when we withdrew from the Vietnam war! More death! Yay! Comment by Cynicon Implant — January 18, 2007 @ 1:57 pm”
****Dear BoobImplant, I couldn’t agree more! Why would we want to end up with a *trading-partner*, like southeast asia is for us now? We have no reason to leave Iraq, and let them find their own government and own path as Cambodia and Vietnam did! They have no right to self determination – dam them *koranimals*!
I’m so glad we *cons* can be honest about how we really feel!
January 18th, 2007 at 2:01 pm“Yes Jay, get that white flag out of your closet. You probably need to dust it off as you probably haven’t had to use it since 1975! Comment by michael — January 18, 2007 @ 2:00 pm”
****Dear angel michael, you know we *cons* never fly that flag! We just poke holes for our eyes and wear it as a pointy hat! I saw you at the *meeting* last week – that white pointy hat looked great on you!
January 18th, 2007 at 2:03 pmmichael > get your butt over to Iraq to fight in the war or shut-up! Real American patriots want the troops to come home alive and not die for oil!
January 18th, 2007 at 2:04 pmI phone Rep. X. Becerra’s office (D-CA) and was told that the congressman adamently opposes escalation. He has in fact signed on the to the Murtha bill for re-deployment.
Ed
January 18th, 2007 at 2:14 pmYo Mikey, the white flag isn’t necessary when exiting a country which we invaded!
You move in, kill, then leave.
That’s not surrender, it’s called SUCCESS.
January 18th, 2007 at 2:15 pmThe result of us pulling out of the Vietnam War was millions of deaths in both Vietnam and Cambodia.
The left in this country that pressured the Govt. to withdraw bear some responsibility for those deaths. And they will bear responsiblity for the large number of deaths that occur if we withdraw prematurely from Iraq.
Is everyone here who is advocating immediate withdrawal ready to have Iraqi blood on their hands?
January 18th, 2007 at 2:19 pmComment by Cynicon Implant #15
…you’ve obviously “lost” any semblance of intelligent, coherent thought…
…long ago…
January 18th, 2007 at 2:20 pm“michael > get your butt over to Iraq to fight in the war or shut-up! Real American patriots want the troops to come home alive and not die for oil!”
Yawn! Do any of you progs have anything intelligent to say? First off I served my time in the US Navy. How many of you can say the same? Jay how about explaining your comment about our troops dying for oil? Although in a way I agree with you, but I’d like to get your take on this.
January 18th, 2007 at 2:25 pm“Yawn! Do any of you progs have anything intelligent to say? First off I served my time in the US Navy. How many of you can say the same? Jay how about explaining your comment about our troops dying for oil? Although in a way I agree with you, but I’d like to get your take on this.Comment by michael — January 18, 2007 @ 2:25 pm”
****Dear angel michael, I so agree! Then again, anything *intelligent* would surely be *lost* on us *cons*! I mean, if you really are an experienced soldier – why aren’t you in Iraq when your country needs you the most? Instead of *armchair* quarterbacking like myself – a former *JAG* that would be useless in combat?
But I agree, that it makes complete logical sense for you to expect these *libruls* to go fight in a war they disagree with, while we *cons* sit by and don’t fight in it, while claiming we do agree with it! How dare they tell us to put our money where our mouth is, those *taxing* libruls!
January 18th, 2007 at 2:54 pmCynicon Implant, in response to you post #23. Don’t those who interject our forces into unclear situtations without understanding of the logistics and the politics of the region need to bear responsibility for the mess?
Your mad because we wake up and find out what this administration has done using our name and we don’t like it.
We need to get an open and honest admission of how we have been missled. The impending doom from Iraq was never there. The ties to Al Qiada were made up. Mushroom cloud, yellow cake, Aluminum tubes. All trumped up by the same group that wants to send more US troops.
For what? 10 years ago Clinton was blasted for being the world’s policeman. If you even start that the world is different you better put down some examples and 9/11 is not the reason we are in Iraq.
Those who started the mess need to bear the responsibility. Not the ones that want to stop it.
January 18th, 2007 at 3:15 pmNow is not the time togive up and wave the wite flag! We need to suport everything bush wants wile we can still pull a victury out of this mess. If your not wiling to suport 110% than you should resine! All those cut and runers our big chickuns! We need to kill all those people now before they get us. Suport the war, suport bush, mcain in 08!
January 18th, 2007 at 3:25 pmmichael > are you not aware that controlling the oil fields in Iraq is the driving force behind Bush refusing to pull the troops out? The Iraq fiasco has always been about the OIL and every other reason just a cover!
January 18th, 2007 at 5:19 pmI emailed my elected neocons last week to tell them to oppose the escalation. According to your list, one of my Senators won’t comment and the other leans toward support. My Congressman’s opinion is unknown.
I consider it a HUGE positive, considering how freaking red my state is, that these Republican loyalists won’t voice support for Heir Bush as they so openly have in the past.
Good work TP and everyone who has pushed for this momentum!
January 18th, 2007 at 5:26 pmComment by Carl Gordon #28
funny…
…almost…
January 18th, 2007 at 7:33 pmI consider it a HUGE positive, considering how freaking red my state is, that these Republican loyalists won’t voice support for Heir Bush as they so openly have in the past.
Good work TP and everyone who has pushed for this momentum!
Comment by unbelievable #30
I was relieved when I heard Olympia Snowe come forward to support the Hage-Biden non-binding resolution…
…also TP’s list of the 414 shows even the inbred Alabama delegation somewhat waffling…
…I hate to get my hopes dashed though…
…I’m like Chuck D…
…”Can’t Trust It”…
January 18th, 2007 at 7:38 pm“michael > are you not aware that controlling the oil fields in Iraq is the driving force behind Bush refusing to pull the troops out?”
Of course it is! I’ve been saying that ever since our invasion. But I’d really be curious to get your take and understanding on just what you mean by “controlling the oil fields”?
January 18th, 2007 at 10:12 pmMy Congressman, Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, is against Bush’s escalation plan for sure, but the link on your chart is to a speech by George McGovern, former Senator and Presidential candidate from South Dakota.
January 19th, 2007 at 12:09 ammichael > controlling the oil fields in Iraq means to REGULATE their output. Iraq’s vastly untapped oil is like a bank savings account to the Oil Cartel Consortium. By regulating the oil in Iraq, the Cartel can control the price of gasoline at the pumps. The desire to control Iraq’s oil is to assure long term profits for the Cartel.
January 19th, 2007 at 12:26 amTo Tesax Young Republicans:
Isn’t one of the Ten Commandments that: Thou Shalt have no other gods before Me?
See if you can rub the smirk off GWB’s statue face.
January 19th, 2007 at 5:27 amRep. Mica from Florida is going to back the President and he says he trusts what the President is telling us. How can he when we have been lied to over and over again.
Where are the WMD’s? They will greet us with open arms, the war will pay for itself with oil revenues, we will leave as soon as Saddam is captured, why are we building 12 massive bases in Iraq, things will be better when they have their own government, the cost will only be $2 billion, schools are opening, electricity and water is available, there is no civil war, etc.
Our occupation brought in the terrorists. Because of our occupation over 60% of Iraqis want Americans dead or out of their country. We are hated not only in Iraq but most nations in the world. We have lied to every world leader. This administration is not only the worst in history but scary.
January 19th, 2007 at 2:19 pmThis president is out of touch with reality. We cannot afford to stay in Iraq. The Neo-Con philosophy of unilateral, preemptive war only builds anti-american sentiment. The Iraq war is a massive failure.
January 19th, 2007 at 4:01 pm