Tumblr Icon RSS Icon

Escalation: On The Record

Posted on  

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D, HI-1)

Congressman Neil Abercrombie said the president’s nationally televised speech made him “profoundly sad.” Abercrombie said he was disappointed by what he called Bush’s “complete incapacity for recognizing what he has done.” [Source]

Rep. Gary Ackerman (D, NY-5)

“‘The only thing different is there’s going to be 20 percent more troops. The difference it’s going to make is you’re going to have 20 percent more deaths’.” [Source]

Rep. Robert Aderholt (R, AL-4)

“None of the GOP members of Congress from Alabama are directly opposing Bush’s latest strategy to deepen U.S. involvement in the war, and some already have announced their endorsement of it. But that many of them are publicly expressing caution at all is a major development for a state that has reliably supported Bush and the war. ‘I think people are growing weary,’ said Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Haleyville. ‘Quite honestly, there should have been more troops there several months ago. Is it too late now to turn things around?’” [Source]

Sen. Daniel K. Akaka (D, HI)

Sen. Daniel Akaka criticized the Bush plan’s lack of measurable goals or an exit strategy. “This is a war that we should never have gotten into, and I oppose putting more American lives in jeopardy,” he said in a statement. “I am disappointed that the president did not take to heart the Iraq Study Group’s recommendation that called for ‘new and enhanced diplomatic and political efforts in Iraq and the region.’” [Source]

Rep. Todd Akin (R, MO-2)

“Rep. Todd Akin, R-Mo., of the House Armed Services Committee, said events in Iraq might now be largely beyond U.S. control. ‘My sense is we may be able to do our part and do it pretty well, but success or failure may not be as contingent on us as on the new Iraqi leadership and on the performance of the (Iraqi) troops that we have trained,’ Akin said. ‘The Iraqis are going to have to stand up and take charge or face the prospect that they will lose a lot of their civilians in a civil war. I’m not sure which choice they are going to make.’” [Source]

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R, TN)

“Sending 20,000 more American troops into Iraq to try to stop sectarian violence is not by itself new or a strategy for success.” [Source]

Rep. Rodney Alexander (R, LA-5)

“U.S. Rep. Rodney Alexander, R-Quitman, served on the House Armed Services Committee when the war began in 2003. Listening to military officials, from former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld down, Alexander said, he worried about whether the troop deployment was adequate. ‘I have said all along that we didn’t have enough people over there, but I don’t know if 20,000 is right,’ Alexander said. ‘I’m a pacifist, but if you’re going to slap somebody, give it all your might.’” [Source]

Sen. Wayne Allard (R, CO)

“I am supportive of this new strategy because it contains a much stronger commitment from Iraqis, in terms of their share of force strength and their financial share of the costs of the war, and includes new thresholds for the Iraqis to meet.” [Source]

Rep. Tom Allen (D, ME-1)

This apparent decision proves that the President remains deaf to the advice of our military commanders, to the recommendations of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, to the court of world opinion and to the judgment of the American people at the ballot box in November. In stark contrast to the previous majority, the new Congress will not give the President a ‘blank check’ but will instead appropriately question and challenge the President’s Iraq policy. [Source]

Rep. Jason Altmire (D, PA-4)

The fate of Iraq is now in the hands of the Iraqi people. The president’s new policy would only increase the dependence of the Iraqis and delay their standing up and fighting for their own country. … It would also push our military, which is already severely strained, to the breaking point. … We should implement a phased withdrawal in the coming months to put the Iraqis on notice that it’s time for them to take over the responsibility for their own security. [Source]

Rep. Robert Andrews (D, NJ-1)

“In an interview the morning after Bush’s Wednesday night speech announcing a troop ‘surge,’ Andrews urged the Democrat-controlled Congress to reject the Bush administration’s spending requests for the new wave of deployments. Congress should pay only for the troops now serving in Iraq, he said.” [Source]

Rep. Michael Arcuri (D, NY-24)

The United States “must find a way to get out of Iraq immediately that does not involve jeopardizing the lives of more brave American men and women.” [Source]

Rep. Joe Baca (D, CA-43)

“Rep. Joe Baca, D-Rialto, said in a statement he did not see a new strategy in President Bush’s plan, ‘Only more of the same failed policy.’” [Source]

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R, MN-6)

“Early in the week she said she was open to more troops but wanted more information, and she disputed news accounts that indicated she supported the increase. Late in the day Thursday, her spokeswoman, Heidi Frederickson, said, ‘If Michele had to vote on it, it would be yes, to support.’” [Source]

Rep. Spencer Bachus (R, AL-6)

“‘The focus now needs to be on what can be done to prevent the terrorists and extremists from winning. Additional troops can make a real difference, but only if they are allowed to do the job without political interference, especially from the Iraqi government,’ Bachus said. ‘They must be able to clear terrorists and insurgents from every neighborhood in Baghdad, including places like Sadr City, which have become a safe haven for extremists. That was an important part of the President’s speech.’” [Source]

Rep. Brian Baird (D, WA-3)

“‘The trouble is, I am not convinced that the steps the President described tonight will really enhance either the safety or the success of our troops and he has still failed to answer key and core questions about his strategy.’” [Source]

Rep. Richard Baker (R, LA-6)

“Staying the course isn’t working and accepting defeat is worse, but they are not our only two options. The American people are frustrated with the situation in Iraq and I share that frustration, but I think a lot of it stems from a feeling that we have been sort of fighting with a strategy of one hand tied behind our back and not doing everything in our power to crush our enemies. We have a strategic and moral obligation to try to win this, to give our troops a policy that provides them the manpower, resources, tactics, and rules of engagement, in short, the tools and the opportunity to win. I hope we are up to finishing what we started. I hope the President spells out in detail the kind of new military strategy and political benchmarks that bring us closer to victory, that the American people can have confidence in, and that members of Congress from both parties can debate responsibly and hopefully support.” [Source]

Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D, WI-2)

“I strongly oppose the President’s plan to escalate the war in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. J. Gresham Barrett (R, SC-3)

“There is no doubt that mistakes were made – let’s learn from those mistakes. Let’s get the right troop levels on the ground, let’s make sure they have specific missions and achievable goals to be victorious in the overall war, and let’s make sure the American people fully understand what is truly at stake, the benchmarks being set and why.” [Source]

Rep. John Barrow (D, GA-12)

“But Barrow ‘would like us to hear what the president has to say before we start dissecting it,’ Lawson said. He said Barrow thinks Bush needs to ‘explain what his goals are and why his plan has a realistic chance of obtaining them.’” [Source]

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R, MD-6)

“Our Republican colleagues from Maryland, Rep. Wayne Gilchrest and Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, have joined a group of Republicans in sending a letter to the president advising against the proposed escalation.” [Source]

Rep. Joe Barton (R, TX-6)

“Finally, the President issued his request for an increase in the size of the Army and Marine Corps. I support this increase, which will further the capability to provide for our national security.” [Source]

Sen. Max Baucus (D, MT)

“I do not support a surge in the number of American troops. Throwing more troops at the problem is not a solution. Escalating the war is not a solution. We must not launch a strategy with that has no benchmarks for success. How long and at what cost will we add troops to the conflict? It’s a mistake.” [Source]

Sen. Evan Bayh (D, IN)

“Sen. Evan Bayh, a Democrat who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee, has not met with Bush and has said that increasing troops would have made a difference three years ago, but not today. ‘Adding troops now only deals with the violence itself, not the deeper underlying causes of the violence in Iraq,’ said Bayh spokeswoman Meg Keck. ‘So while it might lead to a temporary abatement of violence, it will only postpone the ultimate day of reckoning.’” [Source]

Rep. Melissa Bean (D, IL-8)
Rep. Xavier Becerra (D, CA-31)

“Mr. Becerra’s response took a harder line. ‘It is time to discuss bringing our troops out of Iraq, not sending more in,’ he said. ‘Democrats believe we can re-deploy our troops responsibly; we can continue to train the Iraqis; and we then can refocus our efforts on counter-terrorism. And we must bring Iraq’s neighbors into the process to stabilize the country.” [Source]

Sen. Robert F. Bennett (R, UT)

Bush received backing from most of his GOP colleagues in the Utah delegation, who called the president’s strategy sound and were optimistic it would succeed in quelling the insurgency in Iraq. “I was struck by how comprehensive the president’s proposals were and how careful his analysis was,” said Sen. Bob Bennett. [Source]

Rep. Shelley Berkley (D, NV-1)

“Sending 20,000 more U.S. troops into combat will not end terror, achieve victory or ensure Iraqi control. Nor will it prevent Iraq’s continued plunge into a violent civil war.” [Source]

Rep. Howard Berman (D, CA-28)

“Faced with the President Bush’s call for a run-up of troops in Iraq, Berman – who was among a bipartisan group of 15 lawmakers invited to discuss strategy with Bush at the White House this week – said he thinks the surge is ‘a mistake.’” [Source]

Rep. Marion Berry (D, AR-1)

“Berry said the violence in Iraq is getting worse, and Bush said nothing to demonstrate that his latest strategy will result in success. But Berry said the proposal would create additional strain on military readiness as well as on military personnel and their families.” [Source]

Sen. Joe Biden (D, DE)

“I will not to support a surge of troops unless it’s tied to some reason for me to believe that they have a political solution.” [Source]

Rep. Judy Biggert (R, IL-13)

“But we owe it to our troops to give the Iraqis one last chance to show that they are willing to fight for and take responsibility for the future of their own country. We can’t want it more than they do.” [Source]

Rep. Brian Bilbray (R, CA-50)

“The deployment of additional troops is to support Iraq’s new plan for stability. Here you have, for the first time really, the Iraqi government taking ownership of the situation and they are asking for our support.” [Source]

Rep. Gus M. Bilirakis (R, FL-9)

“Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Palm Harbor, said he was struggling with whether to support the president’s plans. He planned to study materials from the White House over the weekend and hoped to consult with military experts next week.” [Source]

Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D, NM)

”I’m very doubtful that the escalation of troops that the president has announced will achieve the long-term results we all desire. We have been told repeatedly by our military commanders that this is a problem that doesn’t have a military solution. We need to be doing all that is possible that moves the political process forward.” Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M.” [Source]

Rep. Rob Bishop (R, UT-1)

“Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, called the plan a ‘multi-pronged approach’ with military, diplomatic and political elements that ‘makes sense.’” [Source]

Rep. Sanford D. Bishop (D, GA-2)

“‘I need to weigh all of the factors,’ said Bishop, a Democrat who represents Georgia’s Second District. ‘There are a lot of very learned military people who feel that to put in an additional 20,000 troops will just add 20,000 additional targets, which is of some concern.’” [Source]

Rep. Timothy Bishop (D, NY-1)

“Make no mistake: President Bush’s announcement of a ‘surge’ in U.S. troops in Iraq is an escalation of this misguided war with no apparent end. The President would escalate the war by sending approximately 20,000 more troops into harm’s way in an attempt to pacify some of Iraq’s most violent areas. His plan operates under the assumption that somehow, some way, there is a military path to success. In other words, this is ‘stay the course’ writ large.” [Source]

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R, TN-7)

“Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Brentwood, a staunch Bush supporter, said that she would support the increase in troops ‘only if it is requested by commanders in the field.’ She also called on Bush to set specific goals for American troops.” [Source]

Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D, OR-3)

“No matter what you call it, another escalation in the war in Iraq is wrong. I will oppose in both word and deed any effort to send more troops.” [Source]

Rep. Roy Blunt (R, MO-7)

“I support the new steps that the president outlined. It is not the responsibility of Members of Congress to dictate strategy to the Commander-in-Chief, who is ultimately responsible, along with the commanders on the ground, for implementing a winning strategy.” [Source]

Rep. John Boehner (R, OH-8)

“Leaving Iraq to the terrorists would be a direct threat to the safety and security of the American people. I commend the President for recognizing that recent strategies have often failed to meet our expectations.” [Source]

Sen. Kit Bond (R, MO)

“Bond called escalation a ‘significant plan that is a much more promising way forward,’ and said that the option of sending more troops to Iraq ‘should be on the table.’” [Source]

Rep. Jo Bonner (R, AL-1)

Voicing support for the troop increase was U.S. Rep. Jo Bonner, a Mobile Republican who said the United States needs to make at least one last attempt to stabilize Iraq or risk a failure that — in Bush’s words — would be “a disaster.” “We have invested an awful lot — both in terms of the 3,000-plus lives that have been lost as well as the billions of dollars that have been spent — in trying to make this a success,” Bonner said, also on Wednesday afternoon. [Source]

Rep. Mary Bono (R, CA-45)

“The remarks delivered by President Bush offer a detailed plan on how to move forward in Iraq; and I hope that the President’s call to increase the number of American troops will produce tangible results.” [Source]

Rep. John Boozman (R, AR-3)

“Rep. John Boozman, the only Republican member from Arkansas, said he was hopeful that the additional 21, 500 troops would stabilize Baghdad. But he was concerned whether the increase would be enough to establish calm in the Iraqi capital.” [Source]

Rep. Dan Boren (D, OK-2)

“I am disappointed to see the administration move forward with such a dramatic troop surge despite strong, bipartisan opposition in Congress. Without a clear mission or effective benchmarks, it is too big of a gamble to take with so many American lives.” [Source]

Rep. Leonard Boswell (D, IA-3)

“Boswell says he wants to talk hear from the president this afternoon and then tonight — but Boswell does say he has ‘serious doubts’ about sending more troops to Iraq. Boswell, a democrat, says he wants Iraq to stand on its own feet.” [Source]

Rep. Rick Boucher (D, VA-9)

“The [Virginia] Democrats, U.S. Sen James Webb and Rep. Rick Boucher of Abingdon, said Bush continues to push a strategy that won’t work — their reaction generally mirroring the predominant feeling among their party counterparts.” [Source]

Rep. Charles W. Boustany (R, LA-7)

“While I agree with some of the proposals outlined in the President’s plan, I believe it falls short of addressing the necessary conditions that must be met before more troops are sent into Iraq. This proposal is a military solution to an internal, political problem.” [Source]

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D, CA)

BLITZER: Can you envisage a case the president that would convince you it would be appropriate to send thousands of additional forces into Iraq?
BOXER: At this point, I cannot. Because I look back to what General Abizaid said. Not one person on the ground said it was a good idea. [Source]

Rep. Allen Boyd (D, FL-2)

“Rep. Allen Boyd, a Democrat, said he does not support a surge in troops. ‘It’s become obvious that this is not a situation that can be won militarily,’ said Boyd, whose congressional district includes much of the central Florida Panhandle. ‘We’re not making progress by almost any standard of measurement.’” [Source]

Rep. Nancy Boyda (D, KS-2)

“Boyda said she believed there was no evidence that Iraqis would be able to take more of a leadership role under the plan. She also said she would vote against a nonbinding resolution to support the plan and against funding it if the troop surge were presented separately.” [Source]

Rep. Kevin Brady (R, TX-8)

“If our military leaders need the extra troops in Baghdad then Congress needs to back them.” [Source]

Rep. Robert Brady (D, PA-1)

“U.S. Rep. Robert Brady, D-1, who voted against the October 2002 resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq, said in a statement that he is ‘opposed to the Bush surge.’” [Source]

Rep. Bruce Braley (D, IA-1)

“Rep. Bruce Braley, a Waterloo Democrat, declined to comment until after the president’s nationally televised speech, but spokesman Jeff Giertz said Braley is ‘opposed to a troop surge.’” [Source]

Rep. Corrine Brown (D, FL-3)

“I stand in wholehearted opposition to the President’s plan to send an additional 20,000 troops to Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Henry Brown (R, SC-1)

“President Bush’s strategy for Iraq is as important as the number of increased American forces. This plan to increase troop strength comes with the understanding that the Iraqi government must move forward to take charge of their country’s defense. Factions within Iraq must recognize the need to pursue the leadership of the region’s terrorist organization. The people of the region in neighboring countries must buy in to the goal of eliminating terrorism. This is not America’s problem; this is the world’s problem.” [Source]

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D, OH)

“‘I’m against an escalation in this war, and sending more troops is an escalation,’ [Sherrod Brown] said.” [Source]

Sen. Sam Brownback (R, KS)

“‘I do not believe that sending more troops to Iraq is the answer,’ Brownback said while traveling in Iraq. ‘Iraq requires a political rather than a military solution.’” [Source]

Rep. Virginia Brown-Waite (R, FL-5)

“Other Republicans, including Reps. Ginny Brown-Waite of Brooksville and Vern Buchanan of Sarasota, said sending more troops to Iraq is a dangerous idea, given the Iraqi government’s inability to provide more political and military stability.” [Source]

Rep. Vern Buchanan (R, FL-13)

“And newly elected Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-Longboat Key, whose 369-vote victory is being contested by his Democratic rival, noted just after the president’s speech that the ‘patience of the American public is waning. It is time for the Iraqi government to play a greater role in its own security,’ he said.” [Source]

Sen. Jim Bunning (R, KY)

“Bunning, one of the administration’s strongest supporters, stressed that he had no details about Bush’s new Iraq strategy other than the 20,000-troop surge reported in the media. But based on that, he said, ‘I don’t necessarily believe that more troops are necessary.’” [Source]

Rep. Michael Burgess (R, TX-26)

“Just as this Congress should never cut funding for troops while they are in the field, we must provide funding for additional troops if that is how we win the war.” [Source]

Sen. Richard Burr (R, NC)

“N.C. Republican Sen. Richard Burr supports a temporary surge ‘provided those troops are given a clearly defined mission and achievable military objectives that will aid in bringing stability to Baghdad,’ according to spokeswoman Laura Caudell.” [Source]

Rep. Dan Burton (R, IN-5)

“[The President] has admitted the mistakes of the past and as commander in chief, he has put forward a new strategy encompassing the lessons learned from those mistakes, which promises a new way forward to a secure Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D, NC-1)

“This morning U.S. Rep. G.K Butterfield said he’s ‘bitterly opposed’ to any troop escalation in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Steve Buyer (R, IN-4)

“Rep. Steve Buyer, R-Ind., said in a statement that ‘the core principle of the president’s plan is to build a sense of urgency in the Iraqi government to take on a greater role in its own security, which is exactly what I’ve been calling on the administration to do since October.’ But he declined to say whether he specifically supports the troop increase.” [Source]

Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D, WV)

“‘The escalation of forces into Baghdad has been tried, and with little success. Efforts to rebuild the Iraqi infrastructure and economy have fallen off of the map. The President has unveiled a plan that continues to chase his Iraq fantasy while ignoring the harsh realities that the rest of the world can see plain as day,’ Byrd said.” [Source]

Rep. Ken Calvert (R, CA-44)

“I support his decision for increased troops in Iraq to reinforce operations to secure Baghdad.” [Source]

Rep. Dave Camp (R, MI-4)

“Rep. Dave Camp, R-Midland, said Saturday that the Bush administration’s change in strategy in Iraq is the United States’ ‘last chance at success.’” [Source]

Rep. John Campbell (R, CA-48)

“Campbell, a Republican who represents Newport Beach, has supported the president’s stance on Iraq in the past, but he admitted reluctance to send more troops in a phone interview Wednesday.” [Source]

Rep. Chris Cannon (R, UT-3)

“‘I commend the president’s openness to new and different approaches as well” as his resolve to defeat the ruthless and immoral enemies of our way of life,’ Cannon said. [Source]

Rep. Eric Cantor (R, VA-7)

“Even as the nation waited to hear the president’s new Iraq strategy Wednesday, Culpeper’s congressman Eric Cantor – unlike some of his Republican counterparts in the House – came out in support of George W. Bush and his plan to deploy more U.S. troops to the region.” [Source]

Sen. Maria Cantwell (D, WA)

“The president’s statement tonight hangs our Iraq policy moving forward on 20,000 troops to stabilize Baghdad. Our strategy must be to significantly change the course by holding Iraqis to sooner timetables on taking security control, passing an oil law, and making the other political compromises necessary to ease disagreements among Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.” [Source]

Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R, WV-2)

“‘Adjustments in Iraq are obviously needed, and I welcome the president’s efforts to bring about these badly needed changes. However, I have grave concerns regarding the call for increased American troop numbers in Iraq and am skeptical of this new plan’s success. I believe the escalating sectarian violence in Iraq requires a political solution, not a military solution rooted in increased numbers of American troops.’” [Source]

Rep. Lois Capps (D, CA-23)

“I am opposed to the President’s proposal to escalate the war in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Michael E. Capuano (D, MA-8)

“‘It borders on the criminal,’ said Congressman Mike Capuano of the so-called ‘surge’ (Read: escalation) plan yesterday.” [Source]

Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin (D, MD)

“Senator Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD) today reasserted his strong opposition to President Bush’s plan to escalate the number of American troops in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D, CA-18)

“I have serious reservations about the President’s proposed escalation in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Russ Carnahan (D, MO-3)

“The President has spoken, but so has the public. Americans want a more clearly defined mission, more distinct measures of success, and a real commitment to our troops.” [Source]

Rep. Christopher Carney (D, PA-10)

“President Bush’s plan to increase troops is a mistake. This will not reduce the violence in Iraq. This is a Yogi Berra strategy: deja vu all over again.” [Source]

Sen. Thomas R. Carper (D, DE)

“I have serious reservations about the president’s new strategy and fear it will not be successful in quelling the violence that plagues Iraq and endangers American troops.” [Source]

Rep. Julia Carson (D, IN-7)

“‘Sending more brave American soldiers into a raging civil war will at this point only intensify sectarian conflict and create more chaos in Iraq,’ Carson said in a statement. ‘I call upon President Bush to recognize that a dramatic shift in political and diplomatic strategy is necessary — not further military escalation.’” [Source]

Rep. John Carter (R, TX-31)

“If the Commander-in-Chief and the commanders on the ground in Iraq…say they need more boots on the ground, then we need to give them more boots on the ground.” [Source]

Sen. Robert P. Casey (D, PA)

“In President Bush’s speech tonight and in my meeting today with National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, a compelling justification for an increase in troop levels in Iraq was not made. An escalation in Iraq is a plan to repeat past mistakes and not the change in course that is needed.” [Source]

Rep. Michael N. Castle (R, DE (at large))

“”Over the last four years of this conflict, we have attempted troop shifts and surges in Iraq with limited results. Therefore, if there is to be any shift or surge in U.S. troops it must be accompanied by an intensive diplomatic offensive to engage Iraq’s neighbors and a transfer of security operations over to the Iraqi government. This comprehensive approach to security was an essential component of the Iraq Study Group’s recommendations and must not be neglected.” [Source]

Rep. Kathy Castor (D, FL-11)

“Democrats have attacked the plan. ‘I heard no justification for escalating the war,’ said Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Tampa, a freshman member of the House Armed Services Committee.” [Source]

Rep. Steve Chabot (R, OH-1)

“‘There are serious consequences to our security if we fail in Iraq. It is important for Congress and the President to work together to address the challenges we face in Iraq and the War on Terror. Clearly, our troops are doing a tremendous job and deserve our full support. However, we must also hold the Iraqi government accountable and insist that they step up and take the lead in securing their nation.’” [Source]

Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R, GA)

“Likewise, Sens. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., and John Sununu, R-N.H. — both up for re-election in 2008 — say they think Bush’s plan might work, but only if the Iraqis come up with a way to share oil and reach other political milestones.” [Source]

Rep. Ben Chandler (D, KY-6)

“‘Unfortunately it’s more of the same,’ said U.S. Rep. Ben Chandler, a Democrat from Kentucky’s 6th District. ‘We’ve had other instances of troop surges since we’ve been involved in this undertaking, and none of them have been successful in the long term.’” [Source]

Rep. Yvette D. Clarke (D, NY-11)

“Representative Yvette Clarke from Brooklyn, says the idea of increasing the number of troops is dumbfounding to her, while Rep. John Hall says any new plan for Iraq should include more translators and more Middle East experts.” [Source]

Rep. William “Lacy” Clay (D, MO-1)

“We don’t need a troop surge in Iraq, we need a truth surge.” [Source]

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D, MO-5)

“Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, of Kansas City, said escalating U.S. forces would stretch already overextended troops even further. ‘Until (the Iraqis) decide to bring peace to their own country, there are not enough troops in the world to force peace on Iraq,’ Cleaver said. ‘The time has come to focus on a political solution to this conflict and bring our devoted men and women home.’” [Source]

Sen. Hilary Clinton (D, NY)

“‘I am not in favor of doing that unless it’s part of a larger plan,’ Clinton said. ‘I am not in favor of sending more troops to continue what our men and women have been told to do, with the government of Iraq pulling the rug out from under them when they actually go after some of the bad guys.’” [Source]

Rep. James E. Clyburn (D, SC-6)

“Majority Whip Jim Clyburn said that with 70 percent of Americans opposed to current U.S. policy in Iraq, Bush is running out of options. ‘This is almost a ‘Hail Mary’ for him.’” [Source]

Rep. Howard Coble (R, NC-6)

“‘Right now, I would support a surge to the United States – not to Iraq,’ said Rep. Howard Coble, a Greensboro Republican.” [Source]

Sen. Tom Coburn (R, OK)

“Mistakes have been made and it is proper for us to re-examine our tactics in Iraq. Americans want a change in the strategy in Iraq. They don’t want a stalemate anymore. They want to win. However, we cannot be fooled into thinking leaving Iraq now will stop future attacks against America. Now is the time for us to ask ourselves whether we want to win the war on terror. For the safety and security of our future, the answer must be an emphatic ‘yes.’” [Source]

Sen. Thad Cochran (R, MS)

Sen. Thad Cochran urged support for President Bush’s new plan for Iraq Wednesday and said Congress should give the president funding to help his strategy succeed. The president “is starting to involve the government in Iraq and the military forces and police in Iraq in a more aggressive way,” said Cochran, R-Miss., prior to Bush’s televised speech announcing the plan. “Together they (Iraqi authorities) have worked with our military leadership to come up with a new plan – a new plan that, if supported by Congress, has a good chance of succeeding.” [Source]

Rep. Steve Cohen (D, TN-9)

“Cohen added: ‘Whether it’s ‘escalation’ or whether it’s ‘surge,’ I go back to my friend Jackson Browne’s song, ‘there are Lives in the Balance.”” [Source]

Rep. Tom Cole (R, OK-4)

“The President tonight announced a new, bold and decisive plan to win in Iraq. The President knows what is at stake, and believes that the efforts he outlined could make a real difference. We should give our Commander in Chief every resource he needs to carry this plan out in its entirety.” [Source]

Sen. Norm Coleman (R, MN)

“However, I disagree with the President’s decision to provide a troop surge in Baghdad. My concern about a troop surge is compounded by the impact it will have on Minnesota National Guard troops in Iraq and their families here at home. I am extremely disappointed by the news that our National Guard soldiers in Iraq will have their tour of duty extended. When I visited them a few weeks ago in Iraq, they were excited about coming home in March. At a time when our National Guard troops and families are making the ultimate commitment to serve our country and defend our freedom, they deserve better than to be told only a short time before their scheduled return that their service is being extended.” [Source]

Sen. Susan Collins (R, ME)

“‘I don’t think the addition of new American troops in a situation plagued by sectarian strife is the answer,’ Collins said. ‘I think more American troops will present more American targets.’ She said in an interview that she was also influenced by a meeting the senators had with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. ‘The prime minister made it pretty clear that he did not welcome the idea of more American troops,’ she said. ‘I would speculate that he recognizes that he needs to take control of the situation, that if he’s seen as completely dependent on American troops it’s difficult for him to establish his legitimacy.’” [Source]

Rep. K. Michael Conaway (R, TX-11)

“I support the President’s plan to strategically deploy more U.S. troops in Baghdad to help the Iraqi military forces put down secertarian violence and bring security to the population. ” [Source]

Sen. Kent Conrad (D, ND)

“‘I just think it’s a mistake to have United States forces trying to referee that kind of a dispute,’ said Sen. Kent Conrad. ‘Our role should be to train Iraqi forces that can take over the defense of their own country. They are going to have to fight for their own democracy, just as our forefathers did for ours.’” [Source]

Rep. John Conyers (D, MI-14)

“Mr. Bush’s ‘troop surge’ is not a strategy; it is a desperate, last-ditch effort to allow the president to avoid admitting that his war of choice has been a failure.” [Source]

Rep. Jim Cooper (D, TN-5)

“Adding more troops in Iraq, as President Bush is expected to announce tonight, would probably be a mistake, U.S. Rep. Jim Cooper believes.” [Source]

Sen. Bob Corker (R, TN)

“In a conspicuous sign of congressional unhappiness with the plan [to add 21,500 troops], only one member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, freshman Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., expressed approval of the new approach during Rice’s appearance.” [Source]

Sen. John Cornyn (R, TX)

“The strategy presented tonight represents a real opportunity for peace and stability in Iraq. All of us want our troops to come home as soon as possible but our military strategy must be based on clear national security considerations, not politics.” [Source]

Rep. Jim Costa (D, CA-20)

“Costa, for one, said he could only support a surge if it were accompanied by a ‘strong political agreement’ among the Iraqis themselves as well as by strong benchmarks for success. So far, he said, he has been unimpressed.” [Source]

Rep. Jerry Costello (D, IL-12)

“I am adamantly opposed to sending any additional troops to Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Joe Courtney (D, CT-2)

“U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., who won his first term by defeating Republican Rob Simmons in November, criticized the president’s plan and said adding more troops is not the answer to stopping the sectarian violence.” [Source]

Sen. Larry E. Craig (R, ID)

“The American people heard a path forward tonight. It is certainly one that I can support in the short term. We will watch it, we will measure it, and we will see if the Iraqi government can perform with the troops we have there, the troops we will add, and the new flexibility our troops have in engaging the enemy.” [Source]

Rep. Robert E. “Bud” Cramer (D, AL-5)

“Rep. Bud Cramer, D-Huntsville, said he would weigh Bush’s proposal but that the White House must present ‘a detailed plan for where we are and how we’re going to get out of this war.’ Cramer noted that top military commanders in Iraq only weeks ago expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of adding troops.” [Source]

Sen. Mike Crapo (R, ID)

“In a written statement, Crapo said he has concerns about increasing troop levels and doesn’t want the U.S. military ‘to be simply standing between warring factions in Iraq.’ He wants to hear from experts who will be appearing before Congress in the coming days.” [Source]

Rep. Ander Crenshaw (R, FL-4)

“I am encouraged by the strategy presented by President Bush tonight. I plan to review this bold and comprehensive strategy with the same intelligent analysis used to craft it. The future of Iraq and the future of the Middle East depend on our success — we cannot afford to fail.” [Source]

Rep. Joseph Crowley (D, NY-7)

“Sending 21,500 more troops into Iraq sadly will result in even more casualties of US service men and women and will fail to calm the raging fires of bloody civil strife. ” [Source]

Rep. Barbara Cubin (R, WY (at large))

“Representative Barbara Cubin was most enthusiastic of the three delegates, saying she will stand by whatever the troops need to do the job.” [Source]

Rep. Henry Cuellar (D, TX-28)

“‘I don’t think we should be putting our soldiers on the front line. Iraq should be doing that,’ said Cuellar, who has visited Iraq and Afghanistan several times since he joined Congress in 2004.” [Source]

Rep. John Culberson (R, TX-7)
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D, MD-7)

“A surge in troops will not expedite or support our overall goal to combat global terrorism.” [Source]

Rep. Artur Davis (D, AL-7)

“Four years ago, the president and his defense secretary made the faithful decision to send too few troops to Iraq to secure the country. That failure opened the door to the chaos of civil war and violence. Iraq is now a failed state, and the surge of forces proposed by the president is too late to change that.” [Source]

Rep. Danny K. Davis (D, IL-7)

Co-sponsor of a non-binding concurrent resolution “expressing the sense of Congress that the President should not order an escalation” in Iraq. [Source]

Rep. David Davis (R, TN-1)

“Newly elected U.S. Rep. David Davis, a Johnson City Republican, said he agreed with Bush that ‘we can’t stay in the stagnation that we’ve had. I hope that 20,000 (troops) is sufficient to get the job done. I don’t think that failure or surrender is an option.’” [Source]

Rep. Geoff Davis (R, KY-4)

“U.S. Rep. Geoff Davis, a Republican from Kentucky’s 4th District, said for the buildup to be successful, the troops must be deployed at levels necessary to sustain ground operations long enough to assure ‘the mission is complete and the political outcome is achieved.’” [Source]

Rep. Jo Ann Davis (R, VA-1)

“‘I just wish it would have been done a lot sooner,’ said Representative Jo Ann Davis , a Virginia Republican and ranking member of the House Armed Service Committee’s military readiness panel. ‘I believe that we’re asking our military to do much more now than we’ve ever asked of them. And for that reason, I think that growing the force is very necessary.’” [Source]

Rep. Lincoln Davis (D, TN-4)

“I’m not convinced, and from what I read neither are military commanders, that 20,000 more troops will change this mindset, but would just lead to more American men and women being killed. Who can say for certain these additional forces would even be enough to slow down the violence?” [Source]

Rep. Susan A. Davis (D, CA-53)

“Iraq needs a diplomatic surge not a military surge.” [Source]

Rep. Tom Davis (R, VA-11)

“I am pleased that the President has acknowledged the failure of our current policy in Iraq and is now attempting to change course. I am skeptical, however, that the troop surge he proposes is a good decision that will be effective.”

Rep. Nathan Deal (R, GA-9)
Rep. Peter DeFazio (D, OR-4)

“Tonight, the president was eager to appear to be changing course in Iraq in response to the concerns of the American people. However, his new proposal is anything but — it’s a status quo, more of the same, stay the course plan. This ‘stay the course’ strategy is clearly not working.” [Source]

Rep. Diana DeGette (D, CO-1)

“Once again, President Bush is sending us in the wrong direction on Iraq. Instead of announcing a specific plan on how we are going to get out of the Iraq quagmire, he is escalating troop levels and deepening our commitment.” [Source]

Rep. William D. Delahunt (D, MA-10)

“Instead, the President has put forward a plan to train Iraqi troops that is unrealistic, a political approach that is overly simplistic and an economic initiative that will have no lasting impact. It is a plan in search of a reality.” [Source]

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D, CT-3)

“I have opposed this war from the outset, and I have cosponsored legislation opposing an escalation of the Iraq war.” [Source]

Sen. Jim DeMint (R, SC)

“We must mount a coordinated effort that will destroy the terror networks, create security and allow Iraqi citizens the chance to prosper. I look forward to hearing more details and working with the administration to achieve success in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Charles W. Dent (R, PA-15)

“Rep. Charlie Dent on Monday joined a chorus of Democrats and some Republicans in expressing skepticism about President Bush’s emerging strategy to boost troop levels in Iraq. ‘The president is under a lot of pressure to make a case to explain how this will advance the mission,’ said Dent, R-15th District, who added it would take a ‘pretty hard sell’ for him to endorse sending more troops to the country. ‘Will the surge help bring about a political resolution and help the Iraqis reconcile their differences? I’m not convinced today that that will happen.’” [Source]

Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R, FL-21)

“‘I believe losing is not an option for us there,’ said Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart, R-Miami. ‘We can’t turn over Iraq to the Iranian regime. A greater Iran with nuclear weapons and control of oil in Iraq as well as in Iran is not acceptable. We have to do everything we can to see that the Iraqi government can stabilize the situation.’” [Source]

Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R, FL-25)

“I am not satisfied with the current situation in Iraq. However, we should all agree that it is in our nation’s best interests to ensure Iraq does not fall into the control of terrorists.” [Source]

Rep. Norman D. Dicks (D, WA-6)

“Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., who is a respected voice on military affairs, reached a similar conclusion. ‘This whole idea of surge, I don’t think it’s going to work. I think it’s fraught with danger that will further exacerbate the problems facing’ U.S. forces, he said.” [Source]

Rep. John D. Dingell (D, MI-15)

“Rep. John Dingell, D-Dearborn, said he had hoped to hear a strategy he could get behind. So far, he said, he remains unconvinced. But he said, ‘I want to hear more’ before opposing the plan. [Source]

Sen. Chris Dodd (D, CT)

“I believe it will be a mistake for us at this juncture to be adding more troops. … I don’t see any mission associated with this. It sounds to me like a tactic in search of a strategy.” [Source]

Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D, TX-25)

“‘This isn’t a ‘surge’; it is a costly, long-term escalation that endangers more Americans,’ Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, said. ‘We must firmly reject it.’” [Source]

Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R, NC)

“In Congress, some Republicans offered cautious support. ‘I am certainly not alone in saying that I am not satisfied with the current situation in Iraq,’ GOP Sen. Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina said. ‘But I strongly believe that we must win.’” [Source]

Sen. Pete Domenici (R, NM)

“‘I have confidence in [Lt. Gen. David H. Patraeus's] pledge to me that he will openly and honestly tell me and the rest of the Congress the situation on the ground as it unfolds. I fully believe the General understands that I, as one United States Senator, am willing to support the President’s new strategy only as long as we can see measurable progress toward security, but that my support is not open-ended nor is it indefinite.’” [Source]

Rep. Joe Donnelly (D, IN-2)

“Donnelly voiced major concerns over the president’s plan to increase troop levels by 22,000, on top of the 130,000 are already in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. John T. Doolittle (R, CA-4)

“Congressman John Doolittle Friday said he backs President Bush’s plan to increase troops fighting in the Iraq War to quell sectarian violence there, but is growing wary of the bigger war picture.” [Source]

Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D, ND)

“I am very skeptical about this issue of deciding that we’re going to surge additional troops into Iraq even as the top military commander in Iraq says that should not be done,” Dorgan said. [Source]

Rep. Michael F. Doyle (D, PA-14)

“‘We should implement a phased withdrawal in the coming months to put the Iraqis on notice that it’s time for them to take over the responsibility for their own security.’ — Rep. Mike Doyle, D-Pa.” [Source]

Rep. Thelma D. Drake (R, VA-2)

Another Virginia Republican, Rep. Thelma Drake, of the 2nd District, said the commitment of additional troops will be “painful for everyone” but argued that “we don’t talk enough about the threat to America if the terrorists are successful” in toppling the Iraqi government and gaining control of the country’s oil reserves. [Source]

Rep. David Dreier (R, CA-26)

“Rep. David Dreier, R-Glendora, a stalwart supporter of the president’s Iraq policy, supported Bush’s plans for a troop surge to help pacify war-torn Baghdad and allow Iraqi forces to solidify the fragile government’s power.” [Source]

Rep. John J. Duncan (R, TN-2)

“I voted against going to war in Iraq when Congress voted on this in October of 2002, and I am opposed to sending more U.S. troops there now.” [Source]

Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D, IL)

“Escalation of the war in Iraq is not the change the American people called for in the last election. Instead of a new direction, the President’s plan moves the American commitment in Iraq in the wrong direction.” [Source]

Rep. Chet Edwards (D, TX-17)

“When asked by the president for his ideas, Edwards expressed concerns about a proposed troop surge. ‘Mr. President, I would hope your new initiatives could be carried out without an increase in U.S. troops in Iraq because of concerns in Congress and across the country about sending more U.S. military personnel there, but if you are going to make that decision, you should send whatever number you believe is right, not a watered down compromise number, because this could be the last real chance to win Americans’ support for a strategy to stabilize Iraq.’” [Source]

Rep. Vernon J. Ehlers (R, MI-3)

“I am extremely concerned about the current situation in Iraq. Tonight, we heard from President Bush about his Administration’s plan for moving forward in that war-torn country. I am eager to look at the details of the President’s plan, but based on the lack of success that we have seen so far, we are going to have work very rigorously to ensure that our plan definitely will work.” [Source]

Rep. Keith Ellison (D, MN-5)

“One of the most outspoken opponents of the war, Rep. Keith Ellison, called it ‘an error from the start. And now the president wants to compound his error, by escalating this occupation.’” [Source]

Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D, IN-8)

“Another freshman, Rep. Brad Ellsworth, D-Evansville, has said he needs to be convinced that increasing troop levels is a necessary part of a new strategy. His spokeswoman said Ellsworth wants to hear not just from Bush, but also military leaders who will be testifying this week before the House Armed Services Committee, on which Ellsworth serves.” [Source]

Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D, IL-5)

“Tonight, the President failed to answer these questions fully, and he failed to offer a real plan for success in Iraq. After three years, more than 3,000 lives lost, and 300 billion dollars spent, Congress and the American people will not support the President’s plan to risk more lives and commit more dollars to support a failed strategy.” [Source]

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R, MO-8)

“‘I am pleased to hear from the president that this deployment of additional troops to Iraq is not ‘open-ended,’” said Republican Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, of Cape Girardeau. Still, I am skeptical of this stratagem when it is extremely urgent that we give the responsibility for keeping law and order in Iraq to the Iraqis.’ Emerson said Bush should decrease the American military presence in Iraq and stress diplomacy with other nations in the region, such as Syria.” [Source]

Rep. Eliot L. Engel (D, NY-17)
Rep. Phil English (R, PA-3)

“While I applaud the president’s reassessment of U.S.-Iraq policy, I stated earlier today that I did not support an expansion in American troop strength on the ground. Nothing in his speech tonight has caused me to reconsider my position.” [Source]

Sen. John Ensign (R, NV)

“The President put forward a comprehensive plan that calls for an increase in troops and putting more Iraqis back to work.” [Source]

Sen. Michael B. Enzi (R, WY)

“President Bush is not advocating sending more troops simply for the sake of sending more troops.” [Source]

Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D, CA-14)

“The President’s statement indicates that he has ignored the advice of his generals, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group which he appointed, Republicans and Democrats in Congress and the American people.” [Source]

Rep. Bob Etheridge (D, NC-2)

“I strongly support our soldiers and their families who have done so much for America. Unfortunately, the President’s reported plan to send more troops to Iraq will likely be ineffectual and the decision appears to be based on more politically inspired denial.” [Source]

Rep. Terry Everett (R, AL-2)

“Rep. Terry Everett, R-Rehobeth, said that while he wished the troop escalation had been proposed earlier, he supported Bush’s plan.” [Source]

Rep. Mary Fallin (R, OK-5)

“Cole, Coburn, Representative Mary Fallin of Oklahoma City and Representative Frank Lucas of Cheyenne all say they support Bush’s troop-increase plan.” [Source]

Rep. Sam Farr (D, CA-17)

“It goes against the tides of history to escalate our involvement at this point in the war. There is a way forward, but that way is fewer troops, not more.” [Source]

Rep. Chaka Fattah (D, PA-2)

“Rep. Chaka Fattah, a Democrat who is running for mayor in Philadelphia, said a troops build up was ‘disturbingly familiar’ to the escalation of troops in Vietnam under Gen. William Westmoreland. He said only a massive influx of troops from other national under the United Nations will save Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Tom Feeney (R, FL-24)

“‘I haven’t closed the door, but at a minimum, I believe the president will need to present Congress and the American people with concrete and realistic goals to be obtained,’ said Feeney, a former speaker of Florida’s House of Representatives and a rising star in the GOP.” [Source]

Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D, WI)

“Tonight, the President ignored the recommendations of members of both parties, military leaders, foreign policy experts, and the will of the American people by announcing that he intends to escalate our involvement in Iraq by sending more troops there.” [Source]

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D, CA)

“‘There are a lot of problems,’ she said on CNN after Bush’s speech. ‘It seems to be there are no timelines, no real goals in the president’s speech.’” [Source]

Rep. Mike Ferguson (R, NJ-7)

“‘I’m not yet convinced about President Bush’s plan to increase U.S. forces because the longer we bear the chief burden for Iraq’s security, the longer it delays Iraqis from making the hard decisions about dealing with the terrorists,’ said Rep. Mike Ferguson, R-Warren.” [Source]

Rep. Bob Filner (D, CA-51)

“In a rejection of Bush’s troop ‘surge’ strategy, the bill explicitly prohibits any additional funding to deploy more troops. The ‘Bring the Troops Home’ Act is just one of many bills currently in the US House or Senate opposing Bush’s plan.” [Source]

Rep. Jeff Flake (R, AZ-6)
Rep. J. Randy Forbes (R, VA-4)

“Republican Rep. Randy Forbes, representing Virginia’s 4th District, questioned whether the U.S. troops Bush wants to add are enough to win the battle for Baghdad.” [Source]

Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R, NE-1)

“I await the details of the President’s plan. I believe that a major component of any new strategy should be a rapid increase of battle-ready Iraqi troops in Baghdad.” [Source]

Rep. Vito Fossella (R, NY-13)

“Rep. Vito Fossella (R-Staten Island/Brooklyn) evaded a firm statement of agreement with the president’s announcement. Fossella voted to authorize the war that began four years ago, but distanced himself from Bush last night.” [Source]

Rep. Virginia Foxx (R, NC-5)

“The war in Iraq is critical to the Global War on Terror and we must continue to fight and defend against the terrorists there as much as at home. We must maintain our efforts to provide security and stability for the Iraqi government and its people until they are able to do so themselves.” [Source]

Rep. Barney Frank (D, MA-4)

Representative Barney Frank is also opposed to a surge in troops. [Source]

Rep. Trent Franks (R, AZ-2)

“I strongly support his commitment to adjust America’s war strategy to a changing and fiercely determined enemy.” [Source]

Rep. Rodney P. Frelinghuysen (R, NJ-11)

Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, R-Harding, said he commended Bush for “working to change the dynamic in Iraq and for putting a new team of military leaders in place.” But he said he had concerns about the troop increase. “Frankly, the first surge of military forces into Baghdad should be those Iraqi units that are the best trained and equipped to carry out combat operations,” Frelinghuysen said. “They should be on the front lines in the effort to quell sectarian violence.” [Source]

Rep. Elton Gallegly (R, CA-24)

“‘The status quo is not going to accomplish our ultimate objectives and we can’t continue to let our young people do the kind of job they’ve been having to do without a clear mission,’ Gallegly said.” [Source]

Rep. Scott Garrett (R, NJ-5)
Rep. Jim Gerlach (R, PA-6)

“Consequently, I support the President’s call for more military resources being deployed to the Anbar province in order to assist the Iraqis in stamping out the Al-Qaeda presence there. But I have significant concern over sending more troops to Baghdad in support of Iraqi efforts to quell Shia-Sunni violence.” [Source]

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D, AZ-8)

“Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Democrat: Has long said she would like to see troops out of Iraq by the end of 2007, and reiterated on Wednesday she still believes that can happen.”
“She has concerns about a troop surge if it doesn’t include a clear plan, she says, because ‘prior increases have not been successful.’” [Source]

Rep. Wayne T. Gilchrest (R, MD-1)

“Even Republican Congressman Wayne Gilchrest thinks the troop surge is a major risk. ‘I don’t think we’ll be successfully at all unless it’s accompanied by a surge in diplomacy with the Middle East and the international community.’” [Source]

Rep. Kirsten E. Gillibrand (D, NY-20)

“Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand would not vote for the President’s plan. ‘Of course we have to make sure that the men and women in the field have the funds they need to have the armor and the training and the support they need to do their jobs. But, if this is something that we have an opportunity to vote on specifically, I would not support this plan because I don’t see how it would be effective.’” [Source]

Rep. Paul E. Gillmor (R, OH-5)

“In his speech, President Bush committed more than 20,000 additional U.S. troops to stabilize Iraq. Personally, I do not know whether committing additional U.S. troops will aid Iraqi Security Forces in quickly assuming control. However, as Commander-in-Chief, it is the President’s sole responsibility to direct our military operations.” [Source]

Rep. Phil Gingrey (R, GA-11)

“What we need in Iraq is a knock-out punch. A troop surge in Baghdad is an opportunity to stabilize this volatile region once and for all.” [Source]

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R, TX-1)

“U.S. Representatives Louie Gohmert and Jeb Hensarling both say they think the Presidents plan could turn things around.
‘Obviously, he realizes that a change in direction is needed. He has not lost the recognition that we are in a war for the ages. We cannot retreat from the war on terror, but we do have to find more effective ways,’ says Gohmert.” [Source]

Rep. Charles A. Gonzalez (D, TX-20)

“I have only heard from the White House of a plan to increase the number of troops in Iraq thus far and it will behoove us to learn what will be the rest of the President’s plan for turning the tide in Iraq before we make any commitments. We in Congress will have to see if what he proposes Wednesday evening reflects what the American people made clear in the November election they wanted — a plan to get the Iraqi government to take over its own security. ” [Source]

Rep. Virgil H. Goode (R, VA-5)

“Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Rocky Mount, as well as Sen. John Warner, acknowledged the validity of the president’s decision. But like their party-mate Goodlatte, they didn’t applaud it. ‘I want to see what comes before the Congress. I will consider what the president recommends, what my fellow members of the House suggest and, most of all, what the residents of [my district] have to say on the subject,’ Goode said.” [Source]

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R, VA-6)

“But on Thursday, Goodlatte, of Roanoke County, didn’t embrace Bush’s decision to increase the American presence in Iraq by 21,500 troops. Goodlatte said Bush is the commander in chief, so his decision must be respected. But Goodlatte added, ‘whether it will work or not, I don’t know.’” [Source]

Rep. Bart Gordon (D, TN-6)

“‘Our troops have bravely performed their missions in Iraq,’ said U.S. Rep. Bart Gordon, a Democrat, ‘but I have reservations about escalating our involvement by deploying more troops and spending more money in Iraq. I’d like to learn more details about the President’s plan because it appears that most American generals, the Iraq Study Group and the Iraqi Prime Minister oppose additional U.S. troops, believing an escalation of troops could ultimately lead to an escalation of violence from insurgents.’” [Source]

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R, SC)

“[Senator Joe Lieberman and I] also strongly encourage you to send additional American troops to iraq to improve the security situation on the ground.” [Source]

Rep. Kay Granger (R, TX-12)

“The President has responded both to the seriousness of the situation and to the call for increased participation by the Iraqis tonight. Therefore I will support the increased troops as backup to the Iraqi plan for security in the Baghdad region with the benchmarks he has laid out.” [Source]

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R, IA)

“The President tonight put forward a multi-pronged approach to help the Iraq government take control of its country. The military, political and economic components are necessary for success — we’ve already learned that one without the other simply won’t work.” [Source]

Rep. Sam Graves (R, MO-6)

“Republican Rep. Sam Graves, of Tarkio, also expressed support for the new plan as long as more trained Iraqi forces ‘step-up and into the fight.’” [Source]

Rep. Al Green (D, TX-9)
Rep. Gene Green (D, TX-29)

“‘The president’s plan is not enough and too late,’ Congressman Gene Green, D-Houston, said. ‘Retired military officers have said many more troops were needed two and three years ago, but were rejected by this administration.’” [Source]

Sen. Judd Gregg (R, NH)

“Republican Sen. Judd Gregg, who called the war ‘not like any war that we have dealt with before,’ said he shares the concerns of many over the increased troops. ‘I intend to closely review this proposal as it pertains to putting more American troops at risk and the cost of reconstruction being assumed by our government, he said.” [Source]

Rep. Raºl M. Grijalva (D, AZ-7)

“The awful truth is that this escalation of troops is a cynical attempt to push back the inevitable and terrible consequences of this President’s decision to go to war onto the desk of the next President. All this political blame-shifting would come at a cost measured in hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives.” [Source]

Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (D, IL-4)
Sen. Chuck Hagel (R, NE)

“It’s Alice in Wonderland. … I’m absolutely opposed to sending any more troops to Iraq. It is folly.” [Source]

Rep. John Hall (D, NY-19)

“‘To just talk about an increase in the number of troops is to talk about something that was done last year without any kind of improvement,’ Hall said.” [Source]

Rep. Ralph Hall (R, TX-4)

“U.S. Rep. Ralph Hall (R-Rockwall) intends to back President Bush’s call for more troops in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Phil Hare (D, IL-17)

“Freshman U.S. Rep. Phil Hare, D-Rock Island, whose district includes Whiteside County, said he’s strongly opposed to increasing troop numbers in Iraq.” [Source]

Sen. Tom Harkin (D, IA)

“Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Ia., said Congress has the constitutional right to deny money for additional troops ‘when the facts on the ground show us that it is not in our national security interest and it will not improve the situation we see now in Iraq.’” [Source]

Rep. Jane Harman (D, CA-36)

“A surge in troops may have been a great idea three and a half years ago but it makes no sense now.” [Source]

Rep. J. Dennis Hastert (R, IL-14)
Rep. Alcee Hastings (D, FL-23)
Rep. Doc Hastings (R, WA-4)

“Withholding military personnel, failing to provide funds for our troops or pulling out of Iraq with no plan to win the war on terror are simply not options.
I am encouraged by the new plan, and I’m pleased that the Iraqis will have more responsibility for their own security.”” [Source]

Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R, UT)

“The president has articulated a fundamental change in strategy designed to win the war in Iraq, ” said Sen. Orrin Hatch. “I believe it is an intelligent approach.” [Source]

Rep. Robin Hayes (R, NC-8)

“Rep. Robin Hayes, a Concord Republican, said he supports a buildup that forces Iraqis to bolster their own defense.
‘The Iraqis themselves need to step up their commitment to securing their own country,’ he said, ‘and (I) want to see a plan that uses our troops to ensure this happens at a faster pace.’” [Source]

Rep. Dean Heller (R, NV-2)
Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R, TX-5)

“U.S. Representatives Louie Gohmert and Jeb Hensarling both say they think the Presidents plan could turn things around.” [Source]

Rep. Wally Herger (R, CA-2)

“If the President, working with our military commanders, has concluded that a temporary increase in our troop levels, coupled with political and economic reforms, is needed to secure Baghdad and the Anbar Province, then I support this decision.” [Source]

Rep. Stephanie Herseth (D, SD (At Large))

“The Iraqi government needs to understand they are on borrowed time, and they must begin taking greater control over the future of their own country. I remain unconvinced that a large new deployment of troops to Baghdad will further that goal at this point.” [Source]

Rep. Brian Higgins (D, NY-27)

“On the specific point of a so-called ‘troop surge,’ it should not be lost on Americans that a surge in number of troops in Iraq was attempted in 2004, in 2005 and again in 2006. At each instance, the expectation of reduced violence and greater order within Iraq was never met. According to the former Defense Secretary, more troops create the impression of an occupation and only serve to inflame anti-American sentiment, a situation which accrues to the benefit of extremists like Muqtada al-Sadr.” [Source]

Rep. Baron Hill (D, IN-9)

“Rep. Baron Hill: The Seymour Democrat said he does not think a troop surge is a good idea based on what he’s heard so far. ‘Sending additional troops is only a temporary solution … if it’s a solution at all,’ Hill said. Hill has said his 2002 vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq was based on the White House’s inaccurate evidence of Iraq’s threat.” [Source]

Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D, NY-22)

“Plain and simple, no additional U.S. troops should be sent to Iraq and the responsible phased withdrawal of troops must begin.” [Source]

Rep. Rub©n Hinojosa (D, TX-15)

“‘I don’t see how this new surge will change the situation in Iraq,’ said U.S. Rep. Rub©n Hinojosa, who voted against the 2002 House bill authorizing the president to use force in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Mazie Hirono (D, HI-2)

“Congresswoman Mazie Hirono also opposed the troop build-up. She called it an escalation of the war.” [Source]

Rep. David Hobson (R, OH-7)

“Springfield Republican David Hobson questions whether this is the right time to be deploying more troops.” [Source]

Rep. Paul Hodes (D, NH-2)

“Veteran Rep.-elect Tim Walz (D-Minn.), who defeated Rep. Gil Gutknecht (R) in November, is opposed to ramping up troops, as are Reps.-elect Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and Paul Hodes (D-N.H.).” [Source]

Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R, MI-2)

“U.S. Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Holland, supported the move, albeit cautiously. ‘President Bush’s proposal to send additional members of the U.S. armed forces to Iraq requires careful evaluation as Congress debates the way forward in the coming weeks,’ Hoekstra said. ‘It cannot be considered in a vacuum, but in the context of its impact on American security and our partnerships in the region. The risks associated with failure are very significant, including providing a base for radical militant Islamists and greater regional conflict. But we need to outline exactly what success should look like and develop a plan to measure it.’” [Source]

Rep. Tim Holden (D, PA-17)

“Berks County Congressman Tim Holden says he disagrees with the surge, but that will not stop him from supporting the troops in the coming year.” [Source]

Rep. Rush Holt (D, NJ-12)

“Let’s be clear: this is not a ‘surge,’ it’s an escalation of the war and it’s wrong on multiple levels.” [Source]

Rep. Michael Honda (D, CA-15)

“As with the decision to go to war in the first place, this proposed escalation is a fundamentally flawed course of action.” [Source]

Rep. Darlene Hooley (D, OR-5)

“In last year’s State of the Union, the President promised to decrease troop levels in Iraq, and yet today he has plans to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq. ‘Stay the course’ is not working. In Iraq, rather than continuing to ramp up the US’s involvement militarily, we need to give the Iraqi people the opportunity to step up to govern themselves.” [Source]

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D, MD-5)

“Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Mechanicsville, added through his press spokeswoman that ‘the nearly 3,000 brave Marylanders deployed in Iraq, and their families, deserve better than what we heard from President Bush last night.’” [Source]

Rep. Kenny Hulshof (R, MO-9)

“‘I will only support an increase in U.S. troop levels if it is accompanied by a corresponding increase in Iraqi commitment to securing their own future. This is what is necessary to hasten the time in which our troops can ultimately leave Iraq.’”
“‘This cannot be solely an American effort and our commitment is not open-ended.’” [Source]

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R, CA-52)

“I think it’s a sensible plan, it’s a logical plan. I’m going to support the president.” [Source]

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R, TX)

Saying that she respects the president for admitting mistakes, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, says the US can’t allow Iraq to become “a safe haven for terrorists.” Mr. Bush, she said, “is working with the Iraqi leadership to implement this new approach and it is critical that the initiative be given a chance to succeed.” [Source]

Rep. Bob Inglis (R, SC-4)

“Now we’re in phase three, a civil war that will end only when the Iraqi people decide they want to live in a unified, pluralistic and peaceful Iraq. No amount of American military might can make them choose to build a nation for themselves. Nation building is not and should not be made the business of the American military.” [Source]

Sen. James M. Inhofe (R, OK)

“The bottom line is that tonight the President offered an extensive plan for success in Iraq. The United States will be successful not only because of the resolve of the Administration, but also because of the cooperation of the Iraqis in wanting to achieve victory.” [Source]

Sen. Daniel K. Inouye (D, HI)

Sen. Daniel Inouye said he supports a general increase of armed forces available “to address growing instabilities in other areas.” But not, he emphasized, in Iraq. “It would only exacerbate a bad situation, and could signal the possible permanency of this conflict,” he said in a statement. [Source]

Rep. Jay Inslee (D, WA-1)

“‘We have to take every step we can, including using the constitutional power of the purse, to deny the president the power to go off on this half-cocked escalation.’” [Source]

Sen. Johnny Isakson (R, GA)

“What we’ve heard tonight in the President’s proposal is a comprehensive plan only if the Iraqi people and the Iraqi government buy in to it and fulfill their side of the deal. [Source]

Rep. Steve Israel (D, NY-2)

“Rep. Steve Israel (D-Huntington), a hawkish Democrat who voted in favor of the resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq but has become increasingly critical of Bush’s policy, said he’d oppose a troop increase without a change in tactics. ‘The doctrine up to now has been a game of whack-a-mole, when you pound an insurgent in one place and 10 more pop up elsewhere,’ he said.” [Source]

Rep. Darrell Issa (R, CA-49)

“Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Vista, said he had hoped for more reassuring language from President Bush about the new role of American troops. ‘I would have been 100 percent supportive if the President made it clear that the shift was clearly to train and stand back, rather than fight forward,’ he said after hearing the president’s speech.” [Source]

Rep. Jesse L. Jackson (D, IL-2)

“‘I’m vigorously opposed to President Bush’s plan to send additional troops into Iraq. His decision to escalate American involvement in the Iraq War goes against the interests of the United States and the will of the American people. Make no mistake — this is George W. Bush’s War.’” [Source]

Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D, TX-18)

“‘The disappointment is that the President has not recognized that the policy in Iraq has failed, and it’s failed on the back of husbands and wives, brothers, sisters, American relatives who have lost their lives, who have been maimed,’ Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee told The Final Call in an interview. ‘Frankly when he promotes an escalation or a plus-up or a surge, he is presenting to the American people, a failed policy.’” [Source]

Rep. William Jefferson (D, LA-2)

“U.S. Rep. William Jefferson, D-New Orleans, said he believes a troop surge is a mistake. The country is spending $6 billion a month on a war that should be winding down instead of escalating, he said.” [Source]

Rep. Bobby Jindal (R, LA-1)

Both Rep. Bobby Jindal, R-Kenner, and Sen. David Vitter, R-La., declined to take a position on the central thrust of Bush’s prime-time announcement: that he was sending more U.S. forces into the Iraqi battle zone. Jindal, who declined an interview request, issued a circumspect statement after the speech calling for a “sea change” in U.S. strategy, although he didn’t explain what he had in mind. “President Bush’s comments tonight indicate that he understands that a change in strategy is needed,” said Jindal, a second-term congressman mulling a run for governor this year. “The military commanders on the ground in Iraq must determine the best way for us to be successful and bring our troops home soon.” Inquiries seeking clarification on Jindal’s position — specifically whether he supported or opposed adding 20,000 more troops — went unanswered. [Source]

Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D, TX-30)

“I strongly disagree with the President’s decision to increase the military presence in Iraq by deploying an additional 20,000 troops to Baghdad in the coming month.” [Source]

Rep. Henry C. “Hank” Johnson (D, GA-4)

“I am opposed to the President’s recently announced new direction on the Iraq war. The additional cost of this new operation is estimated at nearly $6 billion and those are tax dollars which can be used to fund needed programs here at home.” [Source]

Rep. Sam Johnson (R, TX-3)

“I respect the President for listening to others and I must give him credit for examining his policies, upping the ante, and changing the rules of engagement. We’ll finally be getting help from the Iraqi government to hunt down insurgents. As a former fighter pilot, I support his resolve to boost firepower and increase manpower.” [Source]

Sen. Tim Johnson (D, SD)
Rep. Timothy Johnson (R, IL-15)

“I do not support a build up of 21,500 American troops in Iraq because in my view, it is not in the best interest of our country to contribute additional troops to this war.” [Source]

Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D, OH-11)

“Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Democrat of Cleveland, proposed that Bush escalate ‘the truth level’ rather than the troop levels. ‘He should be escalating how much truth he’s giving to the American people’ about lives lost, about war injuries, and about contractors who have been enriched, she said.” [Source]

Rep. Walter Jones (R, NC-3)

“Two North Carolina Republicans joined with Democrats in rejecting the strategy. Republican representative Walter Jones says the plan puts more troops in harms way in what he calls a civil war.” [Source]

Rep. Jim Jordan (R, OH-4)
Rep. Steve Kagen (D, WI-8)

“Freshman Rep. Steve Kagen, D-Appleton, described Bush’s policy as ‘morally unacceptable.’ ‘This really is President Bush’s war and his proposal tonight is not a complete or comprehensive plan for Iraq,’ Kagen said. ‘It’s more of the same. And more importantly, I don’t think it’s based on the realities on the ground or in the region.’” [Source]

Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D, PA-11)

“‘It seems like continuing what we’ve been doing with 20,000 more troops and an inordinate amount of trust in (Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri) al-Maliki and his government. … Even if you were a total optimist … you would still have to conclude that we only have a very remote opportunity of success.’” [Source]

Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D, OH-9)

“I do not support an escalation of US troop levels in Iraq. President Bush cannot lead America to military victory in Iraq absent a viable political solution that puts Iraq back together and redeploys our soldiers from that of an occupying force.” [Source]

Rep. Ric Keller (R, FL-8)

“In a speech in the House of Representatives, meanwhile, Rep. Ric Keller, R-Fla. noted that he was breaking ranks with Bush after long supporting the president’s war policy. ‘At this late stage, interjecting more young American troops into the crossfire of an Iraqi civil war is simply not the right approach’ Keller said.” [Source]

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D, MA)

“The American people are demanding a change in course in Iraq. Instead, the President is accelerating the same failed course he has pursued for nearly four years. He must understand that Congress will not endorse this course.” [Source]

Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D, RI-1)

“An escalation of the war in Iraq is a misguided response to a failed strategy. The United States cannot solve an Iraqi political problem and civil war by putting more U.S. service members in between the warring parties. Sending more troops to Iraq is clearly not the answer.” [Source]

Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA)

“There is no military solution to the political crisis in Iraq, Kerry said in a statement. ‘A ‘troop buildup’ or sending more troops into harm’s way to referee a civil war isn’t an answer, it’s more of the same.’” [Source]

Rep. Dale Kildee (D, MI-5)
Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick (D, MI-13)

“‘Instead of an increase in troop level, members of the CBC believe we must increase the truth level from the Bush administration,’ Kilpatrick said in a statement. ‘The CBC believes that the war in Iraq should come to an end as soon as possible,’ she added. ‘Since the beginning of the war, the Caucus consistently opposed military action in the region. We do not believe that an escalation of the war is the correct approach.’” [Source]

Rep. Ron Kind (D, WI-3)

“‘It (Bush’s speech) was disappointing but not surprising,’ said Kind. ‘We need a new direction in Iraq, not an escalation.’” [Source]

Rep. Peter King (R, NY-3)

“‘The president has laid out a decisive new policy,’ said Long Island Rep. Peter King. ‘The president must make this policy work and Congress must give him the opportunity to make this policy work. This is a war we cannot afford to lose.’” [Source]

Rep. Steve King (R, IA-5)

“I know the President meets with the wounded and with the families of the casualties, as do I. His speech keeps faith with their sacrifice. George Bush is the Commander-in-Chief of all of our military and by the Constitution, he sets our foreign policy. This is no time to discuss surrendering our will to the will of terrorists who will follow us home if they have the means to do so.” [Source]

Rep. Jack Kingston (R, GA-1)

“‘While I’m not ready to lend full support to the President’s plan, I am convinced we all need to learn more. I look forward to additional information and hearings in the weeks to come..’” [Source]

Rep. Mark Steven Kirk (R, IL-10)

“‘I advised against the proposed troop surge,’ Kirk said. ‘The best way forward for the United States in the Middle East is to assemble a diplomatic surge that far exceeds any troop surge.’” [Source]

Rep. Ron Klein (D, FL-22)

“‘Throwing more money and more troops at the situation without providing a system of accountability will only further compound our problems in Iraq,’ said Klein, who supports a phased withdrawal of troops. `And so far, I’ve seen no real proof that a system of accountability exists.’” [Source]

Rep. John Kline (R, MN-2)

“‘As I recently told the president, it’s important for Congress to maintain oversight, but we can’t run this war by committee,’ Kline said. ‘The last thing our country needs is 535 members of Congress assuming the role of armchair generals.’” [Source]

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D, MN)

“‘The solution to this is not more boots on the ground,’ she said. ‘The answer to me is a different way of looking at this, which is to transition to Iraqi authority’ — and to have Congress do a better oversight job of contracts.” [Source]

Rep. Joe Knollenberg (R, MI-9)

“Rep. Joe Knollenberg of Bloomfield Hills offered ‘conditional support,’ but without real progress in Iraq ‘within 90 days,’ he said, ‘we really have to evaluate what we’re going to do.’” [Source]

Sen. Herb Kohl (D, WI)

“‘Against the advice of his senior commanders, the Iraq Study Group and a clear majority of the American people, he is proposing to send more troops to Iraq — an approach we have tried before that has failed to reduce violence in the region,’ Kohl said. ‘The Iraqis need to take responsibility for their own security. Our soldiers have been stretched to the breaking point, and we can’t afford an escalation of our commitment in Iraq.’” [Source]

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D, OH-10)

“The American people voted for new direction. That direction is out of Iraq. Let us rescue our troops. Let us rescue a domestic agenda. Let us reverse policies that created chaos, massive civilian causalities and destruction in Iraq”. [Source]

Rep. John R. “Randy” Kuhl (R, NY-29)

“Kuhl said he will continue to support the president’s plan with the expectation that troops will gradually be moved out of the region within the next year and a half. ‘We should be giving the president everything in the way of resources so that he can fund the troops necessary to do what he has made the decision to do,’ said Kuhl.” [Source]

Sen. Jon Kyl (R, AZ)

“Tonight the President announced a strong effort to bring security to Iraq and provide the opportunity for a political solution to emerge. His plan to secure Baghdad offers a chance to recommit ourselves to victory and is more than just a ‘military solution.’” [Source]

Rep. Ray LaHood (R, IL-18)

“‘My feeling is that we have to do all that we can to continue our efforts to stabilize Baghdad,’ said LaHood, a Republican and longtime supporter of the war efforts who represents Peoria and part of Springfield.” [Source]

Rep. Doug Lamborn (R, CO-5)

“As Iraq remains the central front in the global war on terror, success remains the only option. The President’s plan addresses the stability, security, and economic problems plaguing Baghdad and other areas in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Nick Lampson (D, TX-22)

“‘Like many of my constituents, I have serious questions and concerns about the escalation that hopefully the president will be able to answer tonight — especially regarding their specific mission and its additional cost,’ Lampson said as excerpts of the president’s plan became public Wednesday. But for Lampson, who, during his last stint in Congress, voted to authorize the president to use military force in Iraq, issued words of caution. ‘Our men and women over there deserve more than just a Band-Aid solution,’ Lampson said. ‘We need a clear-cut, deliberate plan. We need to truly listen to the experts and honestly work on improving our economic and political efforts.’ At the top of the priorities was ‘making sure Iraqis can take over their own security so we can start to reduce the number of American troops,’ Lampson said.” [Source]

Sen. Mary Landrieu (D, LA)

“While the broader goals of the President’s plan to bring sectarian violence under control are ones that I agree with, the plan presented to me at the White House today by the National Security Advisor still lacked the necessary specificity to ease my concerns over adding more troops.” [Source]

Rep. James Langevin (D, RI-2)

“Langevin called Mr. Bush’s speech ‘just more of the same. The president just does not get the messages that this is a failed policy in Iraq and he needs to change course.’” [Source]

Rep. Tom Lantos (D, CA-12)

“‘It’s just pouring more people into a problem that can no longer be solved with added personnel,’ he said.” [Source]

Rep. Rick Larsen (D, WA-2)

“The White House ‘changed the sales pitch,’ Larsen said, adding: ‘I don’t buy it.’” [Source]

Rep. John Larson (D, CT-1)

“The rally, organized by Connecticut Opposes the War, a single-issue coalition of political, religious, community and labor organizations, focused on two themes: the Iraq war’s continuing cost in lives, money and American ideals and the need for the new Congress to say no more, particularly to Bush’s recently announced plan to send about 20,000 more troops to Iraq. … ‘What we need to do is escalate diplomacy in the [Mideast] region,’ Larson told the crowd.” [Source]

Rep. Tom Latham (R, IA-4)

“‘The situation, as it is, is unacceptable,’ said Latham. ‘We’ve got to find resolution in Iraq … we’ve got to have the Iraqi government actually get control of the country. I am skeptical about what the best course of action is to take, I honestly am.’” [Source]

Rep. Steven LaTourette (R, OH-14)

“‘Like many Americans, I desperately want America to succeed in Iraq and I would welcome a fresh approach,’ LaTourette said. ‘This isn’t a fresh approach. This is more of the same.’” [Source]

Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D, NJ)

“After all of the errors and incompetence the Bush administration has shown on Iraq, how can the American people believe the President is on the right track? Our military leaders have already indicated that this so-called ‘surge’ is the wrong approach. We should not simply throw more money at this problem, nor put more of our courageous soldiers in peril.” [Source]

Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D, VT)

“Escalating the use of U.S. troops in a widening civil war in Iraq would take us further in the wrong direction.” [Source]

Rep. Barbara Lee (D, CA-9)

“The President proposed an escalation of the war in Iraq at precisely the time when the American people are calling for us to bring the war to an end. He’s like the man who finds himself stuck in a hole and decides the best way out is to keep digging.” [Source]

Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI)

“‘The bottom line is, the main direction has got to be troop reduction. And, as far as I’m concerned, a surge which is not part of a program of reduction is not worth considering,’ the incoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee told CNN television. [Source]

Rep. Sander Levin (D, MI-12)

“The Bush Administration having pursued from the beginning a wrong policy on Iraq, a truly new strategy is needed to force the Iraqis themselves to determine their nation’s future. Adding more American troops is not a new strategy.” [Source]

Rep. Jerry Lewis (R, CA-41)

“‘He made it very clear that the increase in U.S. troop levels will be short-term and in support of the Iraqi government’s effort to establish long-term control,’ Lewis said in a statement. ‘We simply can’t afford to fail, and we must do whatever is necessary to ensure the Iraqi government succeeds in governing their country.’” [Source]

Rep. John Lewis (D, GA-5)

“On Nov. 7th the American people decided to make a change, mainly because they were concerned about the progress of this war. They want us to find a responsible way to leave Iraq and bring our young men and women home. Somewhere those of us who represent the American people must speak up and speak out about this failed policy. President Bush is not listening to the people who elected him.” [Source]

Rep. Ron Lewis (R, KY-2)

“‘Indeed, our continued assistance should not be open-ended,’ said Lewis, a Republican from the 2nd District. ‘The Iraqi people must demonstrably prove their commitment to protect their nation from internal and external threats.’” [Source]

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I, CT)

“I applaud the President for rejecting the fatalism of failure and pursuing a new course to achieve success in Iraq.”
“Tonight, the President did not take the easy path, but he took the correct and courageous course.” [Source]

Sen. Blanche L. Lincoln (D, AR)

“However, against the advice of our military leaders on the ground in Iraq and the concerns of his own Joint Chiefs, the President has chosen an extremely high-risk strategy that escalates U.S. involvement in what has become a violent civil war.” [Source]

Rep. John Linder (R, GA-7)

“I continue to stand with the President in the War on Terror, and I applaud him for taking a strong stance. It is past time that we increase the total force number of active duty men and women serving in the U.S. Armed Forces. The burden that we place on our National Guard is too great and cannot be sustained. His plan to raise active duty troop levels to 92,000 over the next five years is an ambitious goal and will help tremendously in achieving victory in the War on Terror.” [Source]

Rep. Daniel Lipinski (D, IL-3)

“President Bush’s misadventure in Iraq may be the worst foreign policy disaster the United States has ever been involved in.” [Source]

Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R, NJ-2)

Rep. Frank LoBiondo, R-Vineland, said he remained “deeply troubled” that more U.S. troops are considered the first combat option rather than the last resort. He also said he was concerned by the lack of meaningful consultation with Congress on the issue. “I believe the administration has remained willfully isolated from opposing viewpoints,” LoBiondo said. “The bipartisan calls for a defined and realistic objective for our military presence in Iraq should be acknowledged.” [Source]

Rep. David Loebsack (D, IA-2)

“‘It doesn’t make any sense,’ the Iowa Democrat said in an interview. ‘I’m certainly quite opposed to it. The more troops we send, the more problems we have.’” [Source]

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D, CA-16)

“Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, who criticized the emphasis on U.S. military help, said she heard no new strategy, ‘just some change in tactics.’” [Source]

Sen. Trent Lott (R, MS)

“Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, who was cautious in embracing the plan, said Thursday, “This is a change in dynamics and it’s not just about a surge … it’s about 25,000 or 30,000 more Iraqi troops and more police involvement.” [Source]

Rep. Nita Lowey (D, NY-18)

“Since the start of this ill-conceived, poorly-planned, and incompetently-executed Iraq war, I have had three primary concerns: the safety of our men and women in uniform, the future of Iraq, and the stability of the Middle East region. The President’s strategy as articulated last night accomplishes none of these goals.” [Source]

Rep. Frank Lucas (R, OK-3)

“‘We are not making the progress we need to create a democratic Iraq,’ Rep. Frank Lucas of Cheyenne said. ‘We need to speed up the training of Iraq military and security forces, so that Iraqis can take responsibility for securing their country and so our troops can come home.’ Lucas said the goal is ‘to create an Iraq that is stable enough for Iraqis to fully secure their own country, and this plan seems to represent the best way forward to make that happen.’” [Source]

Sen. Dick Lugar (R, IN)

“In addition, Republican Senators Dick Lugar, John Warner, Arlen Specter, seem troubled, at the least.” [Source]

Rep. Daniel Lungren (R, CA-3)

“However, as Secretary of Defense Gates has explained, the reduction of violence in Iraq will produce the conditions which are most compatible with achieving that purpose. It is in this context that the increase of 20,000 U.S. troops slated for Iraq must be viewed. This is not intended to be a unilateral commitment which would have the effect of supplanting an expanding role by the Iraqi military and security forces. Rather, American units will be embedded within Iraqi formations to help them hold neighborhoods wrested from violent groups within Baghdad and Anbar Province. While the Iraqi government’s past performance has been cause for some concern, our expectations concerning their role are built into the new strategy.” [Source]

Rep. Stephen Lynch (D, MA-9)

“Just because we have men and women in uniform who are willing to die for their country doesn’t mean we should require them to do so.” [Source]

Rep. Connie Mack (R, FL-14)

“The American people want to win the war in Iraq, and President Bush thinks increasing the number of troops will help achieve this goal. Although I’m inclined to support the President at this time, it will take more than just an increase in troop strength alone to succeed. While the President’s plan also appears to include modifications to his Iraq strategy, we need to see real results soon.” [Source]

Rep. Tim Mahoney (D, FL-16)

“‘The solution to that problem isn’t overlaying a relatively small number of troops on top of forces that are not succeeding,’ he said.” [Source]

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D, NY-14)

“President Bush — after using false information to sell a war to the American people and Congress, after invading Iraq without a plan to win the peace, after time and time again maintaining a failed ‘stay the course’ policy — is now trying to sell an escalation of the war in Iraq as ‘a new way forward.’ I am not buying it.” [Source]

Rep. Donald Manzullo (R, IL-16)

“‘President Bush tonight gave the American people a frank assessment of the difficult situation in Iraq. I support the president’s call for a new way forward in Iraq, but I am concerned about the decision to put 20,000 more American soldiers in harm’s way. While I am concerned with the call for more troops, I continue to support the President’s ability to lead our troops as our Commander in Chief and I pray his decisions in Iraq are successful,’ Manzullo said, in a statement.” [Source]

Rep. Kenny Marchant (R, TX-24)

“President Bush was clear with his message on Iraq tonight – that his plan for progress is crucial to completing the U.S. mission. ” [Source]

Rep. Edward Markey (D, MA-7)

“Putting more of our overstretched military into Iraq for a risky bet on escalation is a profound error. [Source]

Rep. Jim Marshall (D, GA-8)

“‘I expect that the end result will be muddled as to whether it was terribly successful or a big failure,’ said Marshall. ‘It is something that can be done and can help. Something does need to be done about the sectarian violence.’” [Source]

Sen. Mel Martinez (R, FL)

“I support the comprehensive approach laid out by President Bush.” [Source]

Rep. Jim Matheson (D, UT-2)

Rep. Jim Matheson expressed serious doubts about the Iraq blueprint outlined Wednesday by President Bush, saying it could put more soldiers in the line of fire without a clear strategy for success. “I feel what we’re doing is putting more troops in harm’s way,” said Matheson, Utah’s only Democrat in Congress. “I think anything we’ve asked of our soldiers from Utah and anywhere in the country, they’ve done everything we’ve asked them to do … What our soldiers deserve is a long-term strategy with an endgame.” [Source]

Rep. Doris Matsui (D, CA-5)

“I think most people would agree that the voters sent a clear message about the War in Iraq in last year’s elections. However, from news accounts about what the President intends to propose tonight, it appears he has not heard or has chosen not to listen.” [Source]

Sen. John McCain (R, AZ)

“In October 2006, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) called for ‘another 20,000 troops in Iraq.’ In January 2007, President Bush accepted the idea and announced he would send 21,500 more soldiers into the middle of Iraq’s civil war. McCain quickly endorsed the strategy.
Since that time, McCain has been slowly back-pedaling from the escalation plan, offering numerous reasons for why the strategy will not succeed. He has argued the Pentagon was ‘dragging its feet’ in implementing the strategy. Now, he is arguing that the escalation is too small.” [Source]

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D, NY-4)

“Wednesday night, President Bush addressed the nation and outlined his plan for Iraq. Unfortunately, instead of giving real answers, the President left us asking more questions.” [Source]

Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R, CA-22)

“McCarthy, facing his first decisions about the war as a House member, said he has a string of ‘tough questions’ he wants to ask military generals and administration officials but said ‘I am glad we are getting off to a new strategy.’” [Source]

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D, MO)

“‘Senator McCaskill is opposed to the notion of a ‘surge’ of additional troops to Iraq until someone can explain how this is anything other than digging deeper in the hole we’re already in,’ spokeswoman Adrianne Marsh said.” [Source]

Rep. Michael McCaul (R, TX-10)

“‘I am hopeful that in the short term, the troop surge will bring stability and security so that a long-term political solution can be reached.’” [Source]

Rep. Betty McCollum (D, MN-4)

“Rep. Betty McCollum, a Democrat, called the escalation a ‘terrible decision.’” [Source]

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R, KY)

“The President should be commended for adapting to the reality on the ground in Iraq, and although the new plan is not without risk, it provides the best chance for helping the Iraqi people form a country that can defend itself and is an ally in the war on terror.” [Source]

Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R, MI-11)

“Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.), a member of leadership who took 54 percent in 2006, has offered his support for the troop increase, conditional on the troops’ being used for combat, as opposed to police or social work.” [Link]

Rep. Jim McCrery (R, LA-4)
Rep. Jim McDermott (D, WA-7)

“The President had no plan when he ordered the invasion of Iraq over 25,000 U.S. casualties ago, and his “New Way Forward” is nothing less than another way to fail.” [Source]

Rep. James McGovern (D, MA-3)

“This president lost the mid-term elections. He lost because the American people voted against the war and they want a new direction. This is George Bush’s war, and he should end it on his watch. And if he’s not going to listen to his own generals, the counsel of the Iraq Study Group or the American people, then Congress must confront him and begin to deny him the means and the ability to carry out the next disastrous step of his policy.” [Source]

Rep. Patrick McHenry (R, NC-10)

“Greater control of Baghdad means greater control of Iraq,’ he said. ‘The sooner we win peace in Iraq and authority is fully transferred to the Iraqi government, the sooner our troops will return home safely – and that’s the most important point in this debate.’” [Source]

Rep. John McHugh (R, NY-23)

“‘My concern remains that this plan, whatever its other merits, may be too little, too late,’ said Rep. John McHugh of Pierrepont Manor. ‘As I have said in the past, I believe there was clearly a time when more troops were needed. The question now, however is, will our increased presence in the region actually solve problems — or create more?’” [Source]

Rep. Mike McIntyre (D, NC-7)

“‘I am not convinced that a troop surge will solve the sectarian violence,’ McIntyre said in a telephone interview Monday. ‘Our troops are doing an excellent job, but overall our military is being stretched thin. It’s important that the president formulate what his new direction is and that it is presented in a comprehensive way to Congress.’” [Source]

Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (R, CA-25)

“Rep. Howard ‘Buck’ McKeon also is supportive of the president, said his spokesman James Geoffrey. ‘He believes it [the troop buildup] has to be part of a broader strategy. It can’t be open-ended. The goal has to be an Iraq that can support itself,’ Geoffrey said.” [Source]

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R, WA-5)

“‘While an increase in troops may lead to short-term stability in Baghdad, long-term success is dependent on the Iraqi government being able to sustain the work done by U.S. troops. Increased training of Iraqi troops is crucial. I was pleased to see this plan call for the Iraqis taking the lead and supplying the majority of the new troops with the U.S. troops embedded within Iraqi brigades in order to provide support, training and enforcement.’” [Source]

Rep. Jerry McNerney (D, CA-11)

“Many military and foreign policy experts, including the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have acknowledged that the President’s proposal to increase troop strength is not a solution to the ongoing instability in Iraq. I believe that an influx of troops may actually worsen the situation on the ground. Not only that, but redeploying 20,000 additional troops to Iraq will stretch our already fully deployed armed forces even further. I am particularly concerned that deploying additional troops will significantly hinder our ability to effectively combat the global terrorist threat.”

Rep. Michael McNulty (D, NY-21)

“Instead, [the President] pursues a failed policy in Iraq. The number of American soldiers killed in Iraq now exceeds the number of lives taken on 9/11. And the President’s response is to send more troops into what is now considered a civil war. This surge is nothing more than an escalation of the failed policy that has been tried several times already. I couldn’t disagree more with the President.” [Source]

Rep. Martin Meehan (D, MA-5)

“‘An increase in U.S. forces in Iraq above the current level of 132,000 is the wrong course of action and should not be done without a plan from the administration on their purpose and an up and down vote by the House of Representatives.’” [Source]

Rep. Kendrick Meek (D, FL-17)

“It is hard to see this escalation of the war as anything more than a dangerous gamble with the nation’s security. Our military personnel and equipment are already dangerously overstretched, and the fact that no other nation in the world is willing to pitch in–even the British are pulling their troops out of Iraq–leaves the United States isolated in the world.” [Source]

Rep. Gregory Meeks (D, NY-6)

“‘Tonight, President Bush has made it clear that he is determined to ignore the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, the counsel of his own generals, and the message from the majority of the American people that the Iraq War should not be an open-ended engagement and redeployment should be a top priority. Instead of a new strategy, the President has announced more of the same with plans to send as many as 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.’” [Source]

Rep. Charlie Melancon (D, LA-3)

“‘I am opposed to further escalation of troops to Iraq. We have sent more troops in the past, and nothing has changed. Such a moderate amount of troops is not enough to have an impact on the efforts in Iraq,’ Melancon said.” [Source]

Sen. Robert Menendez (D, NJ)

Sen. Robert Menendez said Bush has had ample opportunity to change course, but has refused to. “It is time for Congress to exercise its power and fulfill the wishes of the American people by changing the direction in Iraq,” said Menendez, adding that he would vote for the Democratic resolution condemning the troop increase. [Source]

Rep. John Mica (R, FL-7)

“‘There’s 435 of us and I think we all have a different opinion,’ offered Rep. John Mica, an Orlando Republican. ‘I’m giving the president the benefit of the doubt. What other options do we have other than leaving?’” [Source]

Rep. Michael Michaud (D, ME-2)

U.S. Rep. Michael Michaud, a Democrat who represents the 2nd District, said he supports recommendations of the recent Iraq Study Group Report that call for a focus on redeployment of U.S. forces to the country’s borders and a stepped-up effort to train Iraqi security forces, a strategy that Bush claimed would fail. Michaud said he will not support a budget that funds additional troops. He also said he opposes shifting U.S. forces from Afghanistan to Baghdad. [Source]

Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D, MD)

“This is a reckless plan. It is about saving the Bush presidency — not about saving Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald (D, CA-37)
Rep. Brad Miller (D, NC-13)

“Rep. Brad Miller, D-N.C., said the plan was not a real change in strategy, but ‘more of the same.’
‘The Iraqi military is going to have to take responsibility for security in Iraq, whether they’re ready or not,’ Miller said. ‘And they’ll never be ready to do it on their own if we’re doing it for them.’” [Source]

Rep. Candice Miller (R, MI-10)

“‘But if people don’t want to embrace freedom, liberty and democracy that Americans are providing, I’m not sure we can force feed it,’ Miller said.” [Source]

Rep. Gary Miller (R, CA-42)
Rep. George Miller (D, CA-7)

“The war in Iraq was a mistake from the beginning, and I voted against authorizing this war. But regardless of one’s position then, clearly there is no sound basis now for increasing America’s military presence in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Jeff Miller (R, FL-1)

“‘We need people who are able to restore order,’ said Miller, who serves on the House Armed Services Committee and recently visited troops in Iraq. ‘If it takes an increase in troops, that’s what we need to do, and they need to be given the ability to fight and win.’” [Source]

Rep. Harry Mitchell (D, AZ-5)

“‘In November, Army General John Abizaid testified before Congress that U.S. generals on the ground were skeptical about escalating the number of U.S. combat troops in Iraq. According to Abizaid, the generals said that deploying more troops would hinder our mission to train Iraqi forces to provide for their own security and stability. The situation on the ground was grave two months ago, and I think we have a right to know what has changed since then, and why it requires an escalation.” [Source]

Rep. Alan Mollohan (D, WV-1)

“Widespread, bipartisan opposition to George W Bush’s plans to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq includes members of West Virginia’s congressional delegation…. Reps. Alan Mollohan and Nick J. Rahall, both D-W.Va., opposed Bush’s Iraq policies before he sent the first troops to that nation.” [Source]

Rep. Dennis Moore (D, KS-3)

“‘The President’s troop escalation plan will not create a stable Iraq,’ Moore said. ‘I was hopeful that President Bush would understand that the American people are ready for a new direction with our involvement in Iraq. Unfortunately, the President’s new strategy is more of the same.’” [Source]

Rep. Gwen Moore (D, WI-4)

“‘With this proposal, the president has completely dismissed the opinions of his military leaders, the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group and the will of the American people,’ Moore said. ‘This is a go-it-alone strategy warmed over.’” [Source]

Rep. James Moran (D, VA-8)

“‘The president’s ‘surge’ proposal will only result in a surge in the number of U.S. soldiers injured or killed in Iraq,’ warned Rep. James P. Moran of the 8th District, a member of the House subcommittee on defense appropriations.” [Source]

Rep. Jerry Moran (R, KS-1)

Republican Congressman Jerry Moran is also skeptical. Moran says it doesn’t make sense to send more troops if the Iraqi people aren’t willing to set aside sectarian differences and commit to rebuilding their country. [Source]

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R, AK)

“Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, adopted a skeptical tone last week when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Murkowski, a member of the committee, said the president’s plan didn’t look much different from past unsuccessful policies and thus didn’t give her much comfort.” [Source]

Rep. Christopher Murphy (D, CT-5)

“I am adamantly opposed to the President’s plan to send as many as 20,000 additional troops to Iraq. Escalating the war in Iraq is shortsighted and wrongheaded. In reality, it will simply put more American lives at risk with no guarantee to bring them home safely and in a timely manner. Temporary escalation provides no path toward long-term stability in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Patrick Murphy (D, PA-8)

“‘The reality on the ground is this: By putting more troops into Iraq, [it] does not do anything to find a solution to what is needed there, and that is for the Iraqis come off the sidelines, and fight for their country, fight for their government, protect their neighborhoods, not to rely on the American forces,’ he said.” [Source]

Rep. Tim Murphy (R, PA-18)

“If the President wants more troops, there must be very clear definitions of their rules of engagement so that our soldiers are not put in positions where they cannot fight back, there must be a clear mission, the roles our soldiers must be clearly defined as support and training, and the Iraqi troops must clearly be the forces that handle the door to door, neighborhood to neighborhood action. The Iraqi’s have to take over. If they do not, then our role must change. A nation has only two options when faced with a question of war: you fight or you don’t fight. We should not stand in a no man’s land in-between, nor tie the hands of our soldiers.” [Source]

Sen. Patty Murray (D, WA)

“‘The voters asked for a change of course in November. The generals asked for a change of course,’ Murray said at a Capitol news conference. ‘I do not believe escalating this war is a solution to the crisis facing Iraq today.’” [Source]

Rep. John Murtha (D, PA-12)

“When we asked about the likelihood of the president sending additional troops to Iraq, Murtha was adamant. ‘The only way you can have a troop surge,’ he told us, “is to extend the tours of people whose tours have already been extended, or to send back people who have just gotten back home.’ He explained at length how our military forces are already stretched to the breaking point, with our strategic reserve so depleted we are unprepared to face any additional threats to the country. So does that mean there will be no surge? Murtha offered us a ‘with Bush anything is possible’ look, then said: ‘Money is the only way we can stop it for sure.’… He says he wants to ‘fence the funding,’ denying the president the resources to escalate the war, instead using the money to take care of the soldiers as we bring them home from Iraq ‘as soon as we can.’” [Source]

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R, CO-4)

“‘While I am mindful of the enormous challenges faced by the president, I’m disappointed and don’t want this war prolonged needlessly,’ said Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo. ‘We must see noticeable results from this new push in the coming months, not years.’” [Source]

Rep. Sue Wilkins Myrick (R, NC-9)
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D, NY-8)

“There is nothing more clear today than that the civil war in Iraq is a civil war, that there is no function for the United States to try to help one side against the other in that civil war. Indeed, one could make the case we picked the wrong side, and that we must withdraw our troops. We must tell the Iraqis that we are withdrawing, and we are withdrawing on a timetable. You make a deal with each other; you live together or fight your own civil war. We are not going to do it for you.” [Source]

Rep. Grace Napolitano (D, CA-38)

“I remain opposed to sending any additional troops to Iraq, and as a member of the Out of Iraq Caucus, have consistently opposed and will continue to oppose putting more American men and women at risk.” [Source]

Rep. Richard Neal (D, MA-2)

“Representative Richard Neal says he’s ‘strongly opposed’ to any surge of U-S troops, reiterating his belief that there was never a connection between former Iraq president Saddam Hussein and the September Eleventh terrorist attacks.” [Source]

Sen. Bill Nelson (D, FL)

“‘I have supported you and the administration on the war, and I cannot continue to support the administration’s position,’ Florida Senator Ben Nelson told Rice on Thursday. ‘And I don’t come to this conclusion very lightly.’” [Source]

Sen. E. Benjamin Nelson (D, NE)

“‘I am trying to maintain an open mind, however, I cannot ignore the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group and our senior military.’” [Source]

Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R, TX-19)

“Another North Texas congressman said he’s going to find a way to be supportive if the best strategy for a specific goal in Iraq is a temporary surge in the number of U.S. troops. ‘What I believe the best outcome is that we continue to make sure that we win the war on terrorism and particularly our efforts in Iraq,’ said U.S. Rep. Randy Neugebauer.” [Source]

Rep. Charlie Norwood (R, GA-10)
Rep. Devin Nunes (R, CA-21)

“Nunes, to be sure, added he will ‘support whatever decision Bush makes, because he’s the president.’” [Source]

Sen. Barack Obama (D, IL)

“There is no reason to believe that more of the same will achieve these objectives in Iraq. And, while some have proposed escalating this war by adding thousands of more troops, there is little reason to believe that this will achieve these results either. It’s not clear that these troop levels are sustainable for a significant period of time, and according to our commanders on the ground, adding American forces will only relieve the Iraqis from doing more on their own. Moreover, without a coherent strategy or better cooperation from the Iraqis, we would only be putting more of our soldiers in the crossfire of a civil war.” [Source]

Rep. James Oberstar (D, MN-8)

“‘Iraqis have to do that themselves. The longer we stay, the more they continue to bicker under our shield of protection,’ he said.” [Source]

Rep. David Obey (D, WI-7)

“Obey, who voted against invading Iraq, called Bush’s request this week for 21,500 more troops ‘exactly the wrong prescription’ for the conflict.” [Source]

Rep. John Olver (D, MA-1)

“Congressman John Olver says it’s time for a strategic withdrawal from Iraq, not an escalation. He also believes the U.S. can’t solve what he calls the ‘violence and division’ there with the military.” [Source]

Rep. Solomon Ortiz (D, TX-27)

“‘He did say he made mistakes. … I don’t think I can support him,’ Ortiz said.” [Source]

Rep. Frank Pallone (D, NJ-6)

Rep. Frank Pallone, D-Long Branch, said in addition to ignoring the wishes of the American public, Bush is not listening to the suggestions of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group or the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Both groups saw no reason to send more troops to Iraq. “Instead, President Bush has chosen to stick his head in the sand, not listen to anyone and continue on a course that is not going to make Iraq any safer for either our brave troops or for the Iraqis themselves,” Pallone said. [Source]

Rep. Bill Pascrell (D, NJ-8)

“‘The time is up, Mr. President,’ Pascrell said. ‘You brought us into this region on a faulty premise and mismanaged the conflict every step of the way.’” [Source]

Rep. Ed Pastor (D, AZ-4)

“The idea of increased U.S. troops faces opposition from Democrats — including Tucson Congressman Ed Pastor and potential rivals to McCain in the 2008 presidential hunt.” [Source]

Rep. Ron Paul (R, TX-14)

“Mr. Speaker, A military victory in Iraq is unattainable, just as it was in the Vietnam war.” [Source]

Rep. Donald Payne (D, NJ-10)

Rep. Donald Payne, D-Newark, called the troop increase “a dangerous escalation.” “Military experts have testified that more U.S. troops in Iraq would do more harm than good, and the voters sent a clear message in November that they are dissatisfied with the Iraq policy,” Payne said. “Having strongly opposed the war from the beginning, I am now more convinced than ever that Congress must take action to end this tragedy.” [Source]

Rep. Stevan Pearce (R, NM-2)

“‘If we’re not successful in this thing, the world is going to be eminently less stable, and it is going to be much more chaotic economically and politically,’ Pearce said.” [Source]

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA-8)

“Surging forces is a strategy that you have already tried and that has already failed. Like many current and former military leaders, we believe that trying again would be a serious mistake. They, like us, believe there is no purely military solution in Iraq. There is only a political solution. Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain. And it would undermine our efforts to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. We are well past the point of more troops for Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Mike Pence (R, IN-6)

“‘What I found persuasive was that (Bush) informed us that this would not only be an increase in troops, but it would be a change in tactics and … a new deployment of forces in tandem with Iraqi security forces,’ Pence said.” [Source]

Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D, CO-7)

“Rep. Ed Perlmutter, a Democrat from Golden, called the plan ‘more of the same.’ Also, Bush didn’t talk about the escalation’s financial cost, Perlmutter said.” [Source]

Rep. Collin Peterson (D, MN-7)

“‘I’m very skeptical of that. From what I know at the present time, I’m not convinced it won’t do more harm than good. But I am going to go to the White House on Wednesday to listen to what he has to say. But I’m skeptical.’” [Source]

Rep. John Peterson (R, PA-5)

“‘In sending additional units of support, we can create a situation in which basic levels of security are provided in parts of the country where the political process has been delayed — in others, outright hijacked — by those who consider themselves enemies of the West … ,’ Peterson said.” [Source]

Rep. Thomas Petri (R, WI-6)

“Petri, from Fond du Lac, said that with millions of people living in Baghdad, sending 17,500 more forces there for a short time – 4,000 others would go to the volatile Anbar province – would not stabilize the population. Nor would the surge likely foster a coalition government “that works” and prompt an agreement on how Iraq’s factions would share oil revenues, he said. ‘After what we’ve done for several years, experience indicates the odds are very slim,’ Petri said.” [Source]

Rep. Charles W. “Chip” Pickering (R, MS-3)
Rep. Joseph Pitts (R, PA-16)

“Rep. Joe Pitts, a Republican, said he was hopeful a troop build-up could work, but he’d like to see the troops come from within the Iraqi army. ‘If we are going to do it, it should be done with the Iraqi troops that we have been training for more than three years,’ Pitts said.” [Source]

Rep. Todd Russell Platts (R, PA-19)

“While I support the deployment of additional troops deemed necessary to fight al-Qaeda and related terrorists in Iraq and to further train and assist Iraqi security forces, the lead forces in ending sectarian violence in Iraq must be Iraqi. I am thus encouraged that the new strategy for winning the battle for Baghdad security and stability involves the deployment of three Iraqi battalions for each American battalion.” [Source]

Rep. Ted Poe (R, TX-2)

“‘The new strategy in Iraq is necessary because what we’ve been doing is not accomplishing our goals,’ said Poe. “I support the new strategy. The country is destabilized and we can’t abandon the country in this condition.’” [Source]

Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D, ND (At Large))

“Pomeroy said the missing element in resolving the war is a commitment to peace among warring factions. ‘I’ve been to Iraq four times and I’m convinced that the United States can’t bring peace when the parties of Iraq don’t want it,’ he said.
Pomeroy said he views Bush’s expected plan ‘less as a surge than an open-ended escalation of the troop commitment we have had there.’” [Source]

Rep. Jon Porter (R, NV-3)

“I support the call for additional troops to be deployed to Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. David Price (D, NC-4)

“‘There seems to be an absolute conviction of his own rightness,’ Price said. ‘That’s a dangerous quality in an international situation of this sort where the facts are overwhelmingly arrayed against the course that he’s choosing.’” [Source]

Rep. Tom Price (R, GA-6)

“In order to reach stability, Iraq must demonstrate an increased level of involvement and ownership for security on the ground. America has valiantly led in Iraq. It is past time for Iraq to demonstrate with action a commitment to achieve success and reach specific benchmarks.” [Source]

Rep. Deborah Pryce (R, OH-15)

“Rep. Deborah Pryce, R-Upper Arlington, who narrowly won re-election, said Bush ‘must convince me and the American public that security in Iraq is attainable, and that his proposal marks the beginning of the end of our presence in Iraq and not an acceleration of the status quo.’” [Source]

Sen. Mark L. Pryor (D, AR)

“‘I’m not satisfied with the level of detail I heard,’ Pryor said. ‘I didn’t hear any time frame for how long these 20,000 troops will stay in Baghdad. Sixty days? One-hundred-twenty days? A year? He also didn’t say what types of things they would specifically be doing.’” [Source]

Rep. Adam Putnam (R, FL-12)

“Republican Conference Chairman Adam Putnam (R-Fla.) has expressed support for the plan and stressed that it deserves ‘thoughtful consideration by the Congress because success in Iraq is essential to victory in the global war on terror.’” [Source]

Rep. George Radanovich (R, CA-19)

“‘I think it’s necessary, because we need to win this effort,’ added Rep. George Radanovich, R-Mariposa, when asked about the proposed troop surge. ‘Pulling out is not an option.’” [Source]

Rep. Nick Rahall (D, WV-3)

“‘The president’s proposal to escalate the number of troops in Iraq is just more of the same. The question is: Does more of the same make sense?’” [Source]

Rep. Jim Ramstad (R, MN-3)

“Rep. Jim Ramstad, a Republican, said that a surge in troops ‘would be counterproductive and perpetuate dependency by Iraqi forces, increase resistance by the Iraqi people, create more targets and stretch our military too thin.’” [Source]

Rep. Charles Rangel (D, NY-15)

“I think it is a terrible thing to ask young men and women to put themselves in harm’s way, not for a military victory, not for a diplomatic victory, but for a surge. What is a surge? How can you tell a family that their kid died in a surge?” [Source]

Sen. Jack Reed (D, RI)

“In fact, it will not be a surge, it will be a gradual escalation over several months. It will represent not a surge in troops, but a new troop plateau. And, in fact, I am concerned that simply adding 20,000 troops will be inadequate even for the task that the president proposes.” [Source]

Rep. Ralph Regula (R, OH-16)

“‘Essentially he (Bush) is saying that the Iraqis have to take responsibility for their country and their government,’ Regula, R-Bethlehem Township, said after the speech. ‘We will be there to help them. And that’s the reason we need some additional manpower.’” [Source]

Rep. Dennis Rehberg (R, MT (At Large))

“Rehberg also said he sees no way that Congress could stop President Bush from sending an additional 20,000 troops to Iraq. Even if Congress voted to cut funding for military operations in Iraq, the president has power to shift funds within the government and fund the increase in troops, he said.” [Source]

Rep. David Reichert (R, WA-8)

“I’ve advocated changing our approach in Iraq and for doing whatever it takes to accomplish our objectives in the region so that we leave Iraq with our mission accomplished – an Iraqi goverment ready and able to govern, security forces capable of protecting Iraqis and policing their nation, and a strong infrastructure and growing economy. I hope the troop surge accomplishes that. There is some indication that some of the commanding officers may have indicated this approach isn’t preferred. I’ve said all along that we must listen to our military commanders in Iraq and it is my hope that the President’s request is in response to the requests they have made of the Pentagon. From what I understand, the President’s announcement tonight on the newly increased focus on political and economic efforts is in direct response to our military commanders’ requests and I’m pleased by that.” [Source]

Sen. Harry Reid (D, NV)

“Surging forces is a strategy that you have already tried and that has already failed. Like many current and former military leaders, we believe that trying again would be a serious mistake. They, like us, believe there is no purely military solution in Iraq. There is only a political solution. Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain. And it would undermine our efforts to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. We are well past the point of more troops for Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Rick Renzi (R, AZ-1)

“Renzi also talked about his recent trip to Iraq and President Bush’s plan to send 20,000 more troops to Iraq. Renzi said he will support the troop surge under certain conditions.
‘I will support a surge only if the Iraqi brigades are brought into Baghdad,’ Renzi said.” [Source]

Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D, TX-16)

“Reyes, who met with Bush on Tuesday to review the plan, said sending more troops removes any incentive the Iraqi government had to take responsibility for the safety of its own citizens.” [Source]

Rep. Thomas Reynolds (R, NY-26)

“‘Like all Americans and Western New Yorkers my patience is limited. I want to see the Iraqis become equal partners or they will lose their chief ally, the United States!’ said upstate Republican Congressman Tom Reynolds. ‘I look forward to working with my Democrat and Republican colleagues to achieve success in Iraq. However, I will not play politics with our troops by threatening to withhold funding for our reinforcements or cut off ammunition and supplies to our troops.’” [Source]

Sen. Pat Roberts (R, KS)

Roberts said his support for Bush’s plan is conditioned upon Iraqi forces stepping up efforts to end the sectarian violence and achieve stability. “At this point, I believe it is the only realistic choice given the regional instability and danger we face,” Roberts said. “But this support is not without limits if, as this mobilization takes effect, we do not see measurable progress.” [Source]

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV)

“It’s a conviction that I have shared that at this point, whether you surge 20,000 or 40,000, it really isn’t going to — it’s going to end up with the same thing. There is no military solution. And the thing that I use is that 60 percent of all shots that are taken to individuals in Iraq, by anybody, are at Americans. So more people there, more people to be shot at.” [Source]

Rep. Ciro Rodriguez (D, TX-23)
Rep. Harold Rogers (R, KY-5)

U.S. Rep. Harold “Hal” Rogers, a Republican representing Kentucky’s 5th District, said if the “short-term” troop boost gives Iraqis more time to stop the violence, then “we have to try.”
“We don’t have much choice,” Rogers said. “The stakes for America are too great. The Iraqis must know they are responsible for their own security, and now is the time. I am anxious for the return of America’s sons and daughters to our shores.” [Source]

Rep. Mike Rogers (R, MI-8)

Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Brighton, said he had ‘strong reservations’ about the plan. He said many questions still remain – military mission and what are the rules of engagement of the troops.
‘I think we need to win in Iraq – it’s very important. I’m just not sure that this will have the desired outcome,’ Rogers said. [Source]

Rep. Mike Rogers (R, AL-3)

“‘If the president and (Defense) Secretary (Robert) Gates believe the additional manpower will help the Iraqi government take charge of their own security faster, and our troops will also be allowed to do their jobs with minimal political interference, then military leaders should be given the latitude to move forward with this initiative,” said Alabama’s 3rd District Congressman Mike Rogers.’” [Source]

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R, CA-46)

‘I’m not giving the president of the United States one last chance,’ he said. ‘I’m giving the people of Iraq one last chance.’ [Source]

Rep. Peter Roskam (R, IL-6)
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R, FL-18)

“Republican members, such as Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), said they want to give the president the benefit of the doubt. ‘We are talking about a global war on terrorism. The president is talking about these enemies that are enemies of democracy, enemies of liberty and enemies of the United States, and we have to succeed in Iraq to stop the terrorists.’” [Source]

Rep. Mike Ross (D, AR-4)

‘It’s a flawed plan, it’s a failed policy and I think it’s going to be a mistake,’ Ross said. “‘This is anything but a new direction. This is more of the same, which has not been working.’” [Source]

Rep. Steven Rothman (D, NJ-9)

Rep. Steven Rothman, D-Fair Lawn, said a troop increase ‘will result in the death and wounding of thousands more American soldiers, costing taxpayers tens of billions of dollars more and do nothing to help the Iraqi people. [Source]

Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D, CA-34)
Rep. Edward Royce (R, CA-40)

“Until Wednesday, Rep. Ed Royce backed President Bush’s Iraq war strategy. Now he’s not so sure. ‘It’s clear that what we’ve been doing hasn’t been working and we need a new course,’ said Royce, R-Fullerton. ‘But I need to see details to see if this is the right course.’ Royce was particularly critical of the Iraq aid proposal. ‘We’ve provided billions with poor results,’ Royce said. As for a troop surge, Royce said. ‘I want to talk to people in the agencies who in classified briefings can give me their assessments on the likelihood of success.’” [Source]

Rep. C. A. Dutch Ruppersberger (D, MD-2)

I think he (Bush) made a mistake. The situation will be there forever until we cut the apron strings [Source]

Rep. Bobby Rush (D, IL-1)

“Last night, President Bush asked for a surge in troop level, but what we need is a surge in truth level. The Bush Administration lied about weapons of mass destruction, lied about Iraq’s ties to terrorism and 9-11, and lied about the ‘mission being accomplished’ and that we were winning the war. We must ask the question, ‘Why are we in Iraq in the first place?’” [Source]

Rep. Paul Ryan (R, WI-1)

“He called Bush’s plan ‘the last chance to get a victory,’ yet qualified his support by saying it wasn’t clear if Bush had developed the best possible strategy.” [Source]

Rep. Tim Ryan (D, OH-17)

Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Niles, called on Bush to ‘end our occupation of Iraq, not escalate it.’
‘Sending more of our service men and women to police Iraq’s bloody civil war will do little to overcome the many problems President Bush’s failed policy has created,’ he said in a statement. [Source]

Rep. John Salazar (D, CO-3)

“Democratic Rep. John Salazar of Manassa said, ‘The president’s request (for additional troops) is four years too late and 100,000 troops short.’” [Source]

Sen. Ken Salazar (D, CO)

“‘Escalating our involvement with an increase in the number of troops in Iraq will further strain our own military and reduce our ability to fight a global war on terror.’” [Source]

Rep. Bill Sali (R, ID-1)

“Newly elected Rep. Bill Sali likened the increase in troops to ‘an injection of heavy antibiotics to kick a serious illness,’ and believes it’s a decision based on sound advice. ‘America keeps its promises and completes its missions,’ Sali said.” [Source]

Rep. Linda S¡nchez (D, CA-39)

“Sanchez, like most other Democrats in the region, said she would vote in favor of a non-binding resolution likely this week opposing a troop surge. ‘If he wants this escalation in the number of troops, my first question is, where are we going to get the troops from?’ she asked, noting that tours have been repeatedly extended and the National Guard is stretched thin.” [Source]

Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D, CA-47)

“‘We’ve had a surge of troops before in Baghdad, and that didn’t bring about a more calm Baghdad. It just escalated the situation,’ said Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Garden Grove.” [Source]

Sen. Bernard Sanders (I, VT)

“Sen. Bernard Sanders, I-Vt., said, ‘I agree with President Bush that we need a new strategy in Iraq but, in my view, that strategy must involve fewer American troops in the region, not more.’” [Source]

Rep. John Sarbanes (D, MD-3)

Freshman Rep. John Sarbanes, D-Towson, also doubted that Bush adhered to the opinion of the American public, saying ‘if any expression came through loud and clear from the election, it’s that people want a new direction . . . bring the troops home.’ [Source]

Rep. Jim Saxton (R, NJ-3)

Rep. Jim Saxton, R-Mount Holly, offered some support, saying embedding more U.S. troops with the Iraqi forces will allow Iraqis to begin taking over the security of their country. Saxton added that the plan maintains that U.S. commitment is “not open-ended, putting the onus on the Iraqis to ensure different results in the security of their own country.” [Source]

Rep. Janice Schakowsky (D, IL-9)

The President is dealing with an Iraq that only exists in his imagination. I challenge the President to answer the questions: Who are our allies? Who are our enemies? What does winning mean? How long will American troops be there? How many lives are you willing to sacrifice? Escalation presumes that a military solution is still possible in Iraq. The catastrophe facing Iraq is political, and yet there is no evidence of a political process that has any hope of achieving reconciliation.” [Source]

Rep. Adam Schiff (D, CA-29)

‘After nearly four years and with a worsening civil war, increasing the number of Americans in Iraq is not the answer – forcing the Iraqis to take responsibility for their future is,’ said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Pasadena. [Source]

Rep. Jean Schmidt (R, OH-2)
Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D, NY)

Senator Charles Schumer calls Bush’s words, ‘more troops without a new plan.’ [Source]

Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D, PA-13)

The president is sending 20,000 more of our young men and women to fight on the front lines of Iraq without any change in strategy and it is the absolute wrong course of action. [Source]

Rep. David Scott (D, GA-13)

Sending more American troops into combat is not the solution to the escalating problems in Iraq. [Source]

Rep. Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D, VA-3)

“If our mission now is to stabilize Baghdad, military experts have already said that an additional force of 20,000 troops is woefully insufficient, so sending these troops will not accomplish that goal.” [Link]

Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner (R, WI-5)

‘As paradoxical as it may sound, this is the first step to removing our soldiers from Iraq, and bringing them back home for good,’ Sensenbrenner said. “‘After four years of hand-holding by the Americans, the Iraqis need to step up to the plate and accept responsibility for their nation. It is now time for the Iraqi people to take advantage of their new freedoms and demonstrate to the rest of the world that the sacrifices of our soldiers have not been in vain.’” [Source]

Rep. Jos© Serrano (D, NY-16)

‘President Bush is like a gambler who has lost everything, but yet continues to try to salvage his fortunes by doubling down one more time,’ said Bronx Congressman Jose Serrano. ‘The problem is that he’s gambling with other people’s lives. There is no military solution to the problems in Iraq-Bush must recognize this reality.’” [Source]

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R, AL)

In a prepared statement released after the speech, U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Mobile, called the troop boost “a bitter pill,” but added that allowing Iraq to become a terrorist haven “is a real threat to our nation’s safety and security.” “If this action will improve our chance to succeed — and at this point I think it will — then I will support the effort,” Sessions said. [Source]

Rep. Pete Sessions (R, TX-32)

“I believe that Congress should support the request of military commanders for additional troops and implement military, political, and social benchmarks for success in Iraq with the President’s new strategy.” [Link]

Rep. Joe Sestak (D, PA-7)

According to Congressman Joe Sestak, D-7th Dist., the military has boosted troop levels in the past, but those efforts haven’t had a lasting effect on security. He opposes the president’s plan. ‘We’ve tried this before,’ he said. ‘The evidence has been time and time again, the violence doesn’t change.’ [Source]

Rep. John Shadegg (R, AZ-3)

“I have been in favor of increasing the troop levels in Iraq since returning from my first trip there in 2003. This undertaking will require a sustained, not a temporary surge, in order to secure the country and enable the Iraqi government to take control and determine its own future. And it will require the commitment of not a minimal, but a substantial number of additional troops, perhaps as many as 50,000.” [Source]

Rep. Christopher Shays (R, CT-4)

U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays said yesterday it would be a ‘huge mistake’ to send more American troops to Iraq if that country’s government ‘doesn’t do the heavy lifting it has to do.’ [Source]

Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D, NH-1)

“U.S. Rep. Carol Shea-Porter of New Hampshire made her debut on the House floor yesterday with a speech criticizing the president’s plan to send thousands more American troops to Iraq. ‘I had to protest this escalation,’ said Shea-Porter, a Democrat who upset Republican incumbent Jeb Bradley in November to become the state’s first female member of Congress. ‘More troops would just provide basically more misery, more pain, more suffering, more death.’” [Source]

Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R, AL)

U.S. Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Tuscaloosa, was asking whether the planned “surge” will do any good. “Two years ago would have been an ideal time to send more troops in to quell the violence,” Shelby, who served on a defense spending subcommittee in the last Congress, told the Press-Register on Wednesday afternoon. “But I wonder if now it’s too little, too late.” [Source]

Rep. Brad Sherman (D, CA-27)
Rep. John Shimkus (R, IL-19)

But Rep. John Shimkus, R-Collinsville, said the additional troops are necessary to prevent Iraq from becoming a failed state, a haven for al-Qaida. ‘This is the last, best hope to support a free, democratic Iraq that is able to defend and police themselves,’ Shimkus said. ‘You don’t want to put additional troops in harm’s way, but there is no better option.’ [Source]

Rep. Heath Shuler (D, NC-11)

“‘It’s an escalation and a continuation of what we’ve heard two or three times before,’ the freshman lawmaker said after the speech. ‘I feel it’s not the right approach.’” [Source]

Rep. Bill Shuster (R, PA-9)

Shuster said Congress must act to increase the size and strength of American armed forces in Iraq, saying legislators must act to ensure the military can ‘meet and defeat the enemy in this war.’ Shuster said the United States military should assist in Iraq, but that the Iraqi government and the Iraqi Security Forces must be held responsible. [Source]

Rep. Michael Simpson (R, ID-2)

U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson, also a Republican, said he was not convinced that sending more troops is the right course of action unless they have a clear mission and the Iraqis understand it is time for them to fight for their own freedom. ‘I believe the American people want to see significant progress soon and setting benchmarks will indicate such progress,’ he said. ‘I’m hopeful that this increased deployment will advance our cause and get all our troops home safe.’ [Source]

Rep. Albio Sires (D, NJ-13)

“North Jersey’s Democratic representatives in Congress, Reps. Bill Pascrell of Paterson, Steve Rothman of Fair Lawn and Albio Sires of West New York, all oppose the troop escalation and say they support an orderly troop withdrawal.” [Link]

Rep. Ike Skelton (D, MO-4)

“The recent speculation in the press regarding an increase of 20,000 to 30,000 or even 50,000 troops in Iraq has left me with many concerns. Everything I’ve heard and everything I know to be true lead me to believe that this increase at best won’t change a thing, and at worst could exacerbate the situation even further. I am also extremely concerned about the additional burden that would be placed on the Army and Marine Corps. The Iraqis need to understand that responsibility for the future of that country is theirs. Beginning the redeployment of some number of American forces would send that message. I urge the President to carefully consider this option to help move the political situation in Iraq forward.” [Source]

Rep. Louise Slaughter (D, NY-28)

“Escalation hasn’t worked before, and there is no reason to believe it will work now. An overwhelming majority of Americans oppose President Bush’s handling of the war and oppose any further escalation in troop levels. Sending more of our men and women in uniform to Iraq will not change the fact that we are bogged down in a civil war that can only be ended by political negotiations.” [Source]

Rep. Adam Smith (D, WA-9)

“In the end, even though I gave the President’s argument due consideration, I don’t find it persuasive. A troop surge is not the answer in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Adrian Smith (R, NE-3)
Rep. Christopher Smith (R, NJ-4)
Sen. Gordon Smith (R, OR)

“I, for one, am at the end of my rope when it comes to supporting a policy that has our soldiers patrolling the same streets in the same way being blown up by the same bombs day after day. That is absurd. It may even be criminal. I cannot support that any more. I believe we need to figure out not just how to leave Iraq but how to fight the War on Terror and to do it right.” [Source]

Rep. Lamar Smith (R, TX-21)
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R, ME)

“After almost a year, the Iraqi government has yet to disarm the militias, establish oil revenue sharing or conduct provincial elections,” said Sen. Olympia Snowe, a Republican, in an e-mailed statement.
Snowe added: “We should not place more American servicemen and women in harm’s way to instill a peace that the Iraqis are not willing to seek for themselves.” [Source]

Rep. Vic Snyder (D, AR-2)

“Snyder, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, said he is eager to hear details of the plan from Pentagon officials today. ‘I think I have more questions than answers,’ he said. ‘I don’t see a dramatically new strategy.’” [Source]

Rep. Hilda Solis (D, CA-32)

“President Bush missed the opportunity tonight to set the United States on a new course in Iraq. His escalation plan ignores the real needs of our troops and the reality of the situation.” [Source]

Rep. Mark Souder (R, IN-3)

“The Fort Wayne Republican said he has ‘strong reservations about the proposal, but I will listen carefully to the president’s address to hear if there’s a realistic chance at improving security in Iraq.’” [Source]

Rep. Zachary Space (D, OH-18)

“‘The president … did not provide real answers to the real questions Americans are asking about how a troop surge will bring about success in Iraq,’ Space said. ‘Without a clear plan and a clear objective, I fear that a troop increase will only deepen the disaster that our Iraq policy has become.’” [Source]

Sen. Arlen Specter (R, PA)

BLITZER: Can you justify deploying more U.S. troops into what you believe is a civil war?
SPECTER: On this day, for the record, Wolf, I would say no. [Source]

Rep. John M. Spratt (D, SC-5)

House Budget chairman John Spratt said he wants to withhold judgment on Bush’s plan until lawmakers get details from the Cabinet and Pentagon. ‘I thought the president made a reasonable defense of his proposal. I just think it takes us in a direction that most Americans don’t want to go, myself included.’ [Source]

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D, MI)

“Stabenow said Bush had offered no clear strategy for success.” [Source]

Rep. Fortney Pete Stark (D, CA-13)

“Enough is enough. It is past time Congress takes America’s best interests into its own hands. I oppose escalation and, given the opportunity, will vote against providing billions in funding to deploy thousands of additional troops. Rather than send more servicemen and women to die in Iraq, we should serve the will of the American people and bring all of our troops home.” [Source]

Rep. Cliff Stearns (R, FL-6)

“I would prefer seeing more Iraqi troops deployed to Baghdad to secure the capital. However, if more American troops will lead to success, then I am willing to consider this request if it is backed up by a new plan that will produce results.” [Source]

Sen. Ted Stevens (R, AK)

“‘The president’s new plan should help restore security and the safety of our troops,’ Stevens said. ‘There are no easy solutions in Iraq, but the president made it clear that we must make fundamental shifts in our strategy.’” [Source]

Rep. Bart Stupak (D, MI-1)

“‘Sending more of our young men and women into harm’s way is exactly the wrong policy,’ Stupak’s letter continues. ‘By increasing our presence, we will invite even more attacks on American personnel and reinforce the idea that the United States is in Iraq as occupiers rather than liberators, leaving Iraqis more dependent on U.S. personnel for their security. Instead of more troops, we need a plan to begin bringing our troops home and turning responsibility for Iraq over to the Iraqis.’” [Source]

Rep. John Sullivan (R, OK-1)

“I am supportive of President Bush’s request for more troops because of his assurances tonight that they will be there to serve a specific mission: to assist the Iraqi Security Forces in securing Baghdad and ending sectarian violence plaguing the country.” [Source]

Sen. John Sununu (R, NH)

“These changes in [military] tactics make sense, but they can be implemented without a significant increase in U.S. troop presence. If they are shown to be effective, our new commanders in Iraq can then make the case for expanding their implementation. Congress and the American people want them to succeed and respond accordingly.” [Source]

Rep. Betty Sutton (D, OH-13)

“Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Copley, is opposed to sending more troops. Her spokesman Linden Zakula said Sutton believes Americans ‘spoke loud and clear on election day that they’re against the escalation.’” [Source]

Rep. Thomas Tancredo (R, CO-6)

“The bigger question raised by the President, however, is whether an increased American military presence in Iraq will aid us in winning the global war against radical Islam — and I am not convinced that it will.” [Source]

Rep. John Tanner (D, TN-8)

“We can only try to force a square peg into a round hole for so long.” [Source]

Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D, CA-10)

“‘We’re not going to fight their civil war for them,’ says Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D) of California, who chairs the strategic forces subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee. She supports a shift of existing US forces out of areas of sectarian violence.” [Source]

Rep. Gene Taylor (D, MS-4)

“Aside from his insurance battles, [US Rep Gene] Taylor is among a growing bipartisan group of leaders in Washington who lack confidence in President Bush’s call to increase by 21,500 the number of U.S. troops in Iraq, with nearly 17,000 of them deployed to Baghdad around Sadr City, the bloody center of the country’s civil war.” [Link]

Rep. Lee Terry (R, NE-2)

“While I appreciate the President being contrite, my focus is whether we are going in a new direction that will allow us to more quickly secure Iraq, stabilize the region, and then begin bringing our troops home. If adding 20,000 additional troops to properly train and support Iraqi security forces will accomplish those goals, then I support the President’s plan.” [Source]

Sen. John Tester (D, MT)

“Tester, a Democrat, told a joint session of the state House and Senate that he opposes President Bush’s plan for what the White House calls a surge in Iraq — that is, sending extra troops — saying it will only escalate strife in that country.” [Source]

Sen. Craig Thomas (R, WY)

“What folks in Wyoming should understand is that our President has set out more than just a troop surge — it’s a plan for success in Iraq. If the troop increase does indeed allow Iraq to establish a unity government then that is a prudent step, given that we get the Iraqi government to take equal action with their own economic and political agenda for success.” [Source]

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D, MS-2)

“We need a truth surge from the President and this Administration and not a troop surge.” [Source]

Rep. Mike Thompson (D, CA-1)

“I am adamantly opposed to the president’s proposal to escalate our involvement in Iraq’s civil war.” [Source]

Rep. Mac Thornberry (R, TX-13)

“‘I am not interested in sending in more troops just to have more boots on the ground,’ he said. ‘I am not interested in doing more of what has not been working.’” [Source]

Sen. John Thune (R, SD)

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., heralded the president’s plan, calling it one that puts Iraqis in the lead. “The president put a plan forward that gets Iraqis more into the fight,” Thune said. He said pulling out of Iraq now, as some have suggested, would be disastrous and would only leave chaos and instability. [Source]

Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R, KS-4)

“President Bush outlined a way forward in Iraq with Iraqi troops meeting the challenges and taking the lead. American forces will assist Iraqi troops as they stand up and take responsibility.” [Source]

Rep. Patrick Tiberi (R, OH-12)
Rep. John Tierney (D, MA-6)

“Tierney, who was easily re-elected to a sixth term in November, said instead of increasing the number of troops, the president should redeploy them in Iraq, away from front lines.” [Source]

Rep. Edolphus Towns (D, NY-10)

“Congressman Edolphus Towns, 10th Congressional District New York, is expressing his disappointment in the Bush Administration’s decision to increase troop levels in Iraq instead of setting a date certain to bring American service men and women home.” [Source]

Rep. Michael Turner (R, OH-3)
Rep. Mark Udall (D, CO-2)

“‘I think President Bush is on the wrong track in calling for an escalation of military force in the Iraq war.’” [Source]

Rep. Tom Udall (D, NM-3)

“‘Escalating our involvement in the war and the number of American troops on the ground does not guarantee progress in Iraq and sends precisely the wrong message to the Iraqis. Their government must take greater responsibility for their own security.’” [Source]

Rep. Fred Upton (R, MI-6)

“‘We are clearly at a crossroads, and now is the time for the Iraqis to pick up the baton and lead. We should not be debating an increase in troops, but rather we should be developing an end-game strategy that will responsibly and honorably bring our troops home to their families and a grateful nation.’” [Source]

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D, MD-8)

“‘By calling for a rapid escalation of American troops in the war in Iraq, the President rebuffed the advice of key commanders, thumbed his nose at the recommendations of the bipartisan Baker-Hamilton Commission, and, worst of all ignored the will of the American people.’” [Source]

Rep. Nydia Vel¡zquez (D, NY-12)
Rep. Peter Visclosky (D, IN-1)

“I oppose the president’s plan to escalate the war in Iraq.” [Source]

Sen. David Vitter (R, LA)

Both Rep. Bobby Jindal, R-Kenner, and Sen. David Vitter, R-La., declined to take a position on the central thrust of Bush’s prime-time announcement: that he was sending more U.S. forces into the Iraqi battle zone. [Source]

Sen. George Voinovich (R, OH)

Also not persuaded is Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “At this point I am skeptical that a surge in troops alone will bring an end to sectarian violence and the insurgency that is fomenting instability in Iraq,” Voinovich said. “The generals who have served there do not believe additional troops alone will help. And my faith in Prime Minister [Nouri] al-Maliki’s political will to make the hard choices necessary to bring about a political solution is fragile at best.” [Source]

Rep. Timothy Walberg (R, MI-7)

“Walberg said he favors the president’s proposal because, ‘The majority of the people still want our United States forces to come home in victory.’” [Source]

Rep. Greg Walden (R, OR-2)

“Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., on a visit to Bend Monday, said he has ‘real reservations’ about the potential success of President Bush’s plans to increase troops in Iraq.” [Link]

Rep. James Walsh (R, NY-25)

Rep. James Walsh, said it was vital that Iraqis themselves resolve the conflict. ‘What we can and should do is give Iraqi security forces the tools they need — to the best of our ability — and then let the Iraqi people determine the destiny of their country while withdrawing our troops,’ Walsh said. [Source]

Rep. Timothy Walz (D, MN-1)

“The continued wishful thinking and the forward rhetoric on this is not moving us any closer on this and I wasn’t provided any metrics of what success looks like, the president says this isn’t open ended but we were given no benchmarks of success, we were just told that if we want to see freedom and freedom sustained we need to trust him on this one.” [Source]

Rep. Zach Wamp (R, TN-3)

“The current number of soldiers cannot help the growing Iraqi army when and where they need it most. More battalions will help meet the security needs of the Iraqi reformers, allowing them to openly support Iraqi security forces without being vulnerable to radical groups. Baghdad needs to be safer for Iraqi forces to take the reins and for America to leave Iraq having achieved an important victory in the War on Terror.” [Source]

Sen. John Warner (R, VA)

“Sen. John Warner (R-VA) will introduce a resolution today ‘making clear that he does not support the President on increasing the troop levels in Iraq’ and calling escalation ‘a mistake,’ CNN’s Dana Bash reports.” [Source]

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D, FL-20)

“The President has failed to convince many current and former military commanders of the need for additional troops and I believe he has failed to convince the American public.” [Source]

Rep. Maxine Waters (D, CA-35)

“The President is making a profound mistake by increasing the number of U.S. servicemembers in Iraq. In his speech tonight, he declared that he will send more than 20,000 troops to Iraq. The President also said it was a mistake not sending more troops to Iraq sooner. Tonight’s decision will only compound the mistake of invading Iraq in the first place — as the saying goes, ‘when you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you do is stop digging.’ By sending more troops to Iraq, the President is digging us into a deeper hole.” [Source]

Rep. Diane Watson (D, CA-33)

“I am adamantly opposed to President Bush’s decision to escalate the number of American troops in Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Melvin Watt (D, NC-12)

“I don’t think a surge will work,” he said. “That is basically a continuation of an existing policy. And this notion that we can correct something that we shouldn’t have done in the first place by adding additional troops doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.” [Source]

Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA-30)
Sen. Jim Webb (D, VA)

“There will never be true peace in Iraq as long as there are American combat forces in the streets of Iraq.” [Source]

Rep. Anthony Weiner (D, NY-9)

Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-Brooklyn) said he was dismayed that Bush wants to escalate the war when the military is already stretched thin. “I think it’s a bad idea at a bad time,” he said. [Source]

Rep. Peter Welch (D, VT (At Large))

Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., said he, too, supported efforts to put the brakes on the White House. “I certainly would oppose funding for an escalation,” he said in a phone interview. [Source]

Rep. Dave Weldon (R, FL-15)

The U.S., he said, would be less safe if Democrats succeed “in calling it quits before Iraq is a stable democracy.” [Source]

Rep. Jerry Weller (R, IL-11)

There simply is no other option for Iraq but success,” he said in a prepared statement. “As the president’s call for 20,000 more troops suggests, it is clear the current strategy to achieve that success is not working.” Weller said it is up to the nation’s military commanders to dictate how military operations proceed in Iraq. “Politicians have a reputation for botching such decisions,” he said, noting he supports the need for the additional troops if they can provide the necessary manpower to provide stability. “I stand with the commanders and their troops.” [Source]

Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R, GA-3)

Lynn Westmoreland, R-GA, said a significant increase in U.S. forces was the only hope for bringing stability to Iraq. President Bush made it clear tonight that this is not an open-ended commitment, Westmoreland said. “This marks the boldest statement so far that we expect the Iraqi government to get its house in order. We must see Iraqi forces taking an ever-larger role in securing their own country.” [Source]

Rep. Robert Wexler (D, FL-19)

If the president had proposed this three years ago, it may have had merit, said Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Boca Raton, who plans to press Rice on the administration’s goals.
“Today it seems to be a repeat of the failed strategy of the summer of 2006, where we added 12,000 American troops only to see the sectarian violence increase. [Source]

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D, RI)

“Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse sees it as ‘a leap down the same road we have been on all these years.’” [Source]

Rep. Ed Whitfield (R, KY-1)

“At this time, I am inclined to support the presidents call for a temporary increase in troops serving in Iraq. I believe the additional troops will perform a significant role in supporting the Iraqis efforts to stabilize their country.” [Source]

Rep. Roger Wicker (R, MS-1)

“Rep. Roger Wicker, R-Tupelo, said Bush’s new strategy enunciated in a Wednesday night speech “gives us our best chance for success,” adding that the weight of responsibility falls to the Iraqi leadership and armed forces.” [Source]

Rep. Charles Wilson (D, OH-6)
Rep. Heather Wilson (R, NM-1)

“I am not a supporter of a surge to do for the Iraqis what the Iraqis will not do for themselves. I also have not seen a clarity of mission. And I think that’s the greatest weakness that we have right now.We’re talking about goals in lofty terms that are not vital American national interests. American troops should only go into harm’s way to protect America’s vital national interests.” [Source]

Rep. Joe Wilson (R, SC-2)

“Last week, I joined with House Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Duncan Hunter and 26 other House Republicans in encouraging the president to move more Iraqi forces into Baghdad. I was pleased to hear this is exactly what will happen. Through combat experience, Iraqi forces will mature and will more quickly assume full control of Iraq’s security.” [Source]

Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R, VA-10)

“Wolf said that while the president’s new strategy includes a number of the panel’s recommendations, it is missing an important element: the pursuit of a new diplomatic offensive.” [Link]

Rep. Lynn C. Woolsey (D, CA-6)

“I’m certain that every day we’re there our military presence makes the situation worse. Sending more troops will only fuel the insurgency.” [Source]

Rep. David Wu (D, OR-1)

“I agree with our professional military. It is high time for Iraqis to fight for Iraqis, rather than to have Americans fight for Iraqis.” [Source]

Sen. Ron Wyden (D, OR)

“When it comes to ending the violence in Iraq, only the Iraqis can make the tough choices necessary to stop the civil war…The Iraqis won’t make these tough choices until they see that U.S. troops won’t hold their hands forever. It’s time to start bringing our men and women in uniform home so that the Iraqis will do what it takes to promote stability and lasting peace.” [Source]

Rep. Albert Russell Wynn (D, MD-4)

“We would be looking at ways to restrict funding that would not harm the troops or put them at risk, but yet prohibit the president from advancing the war in any way, including sending additional troops.” [Source]

Rep. John Yarmuth (D, KY-3)

“It is simply unacceptable to ask more than 20,000 additional soldiers for the willingness to give their lives when President Bush won’t give them a true strategy for success.” [Source]

Rep. Bill Young (R, FL-10)

“‘Once you engage there aren’t a lot of options as to how you get out,’ Young said. ‘I’m reluctant to say (the 21,500) are enough; it’s not enough. It can’t be a snap decision.’” [Source]

Rep. Don Young (R, AK (At Large))

“Young backed Bush’s plan and complimented the president for acknowledging the need for a new strategy. ‘For the president to recognize the shortcomings we have endured thus far, and work to change them, allows me to support him in this endeavor,’ Young said.” [Source]