Vital Elements Why I voted for the HR 4939 spending package. BY PETER DEFAZIO I am writing in response to a recent EW letter (6/8) asking for an explanation for my vote in favor of funding our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. I am happy to provide the explanation. If the vote on HR 4939, legislation that included $67 billion for U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, had been a straight up or down vote on whether to continue with an open-ended commitment to the war in Iraq without a plan or timeline to bring home our troops promptly, I would have voted against it. But, that's not what the vote was about. I have a lengthy history of opposition to the Iraq war. I was one of 133 in the House to vote against authorizing the war in October 2002. I first called for a timeline and a strategy for bringing our troops home more than a year ago in February 2005. I am one of 67 cosponsors of HJ Res. 55, a bipartisan bill calling for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. And I am one of 103 cosponsors of HJ Res. 73, a resolution introduced by decorated war veteran Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) calling for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Perhaps the letter writer should spend less time ranting at members of Congress who share her views and more time trying to persuade the vast majority of members who have not gone on record in favor of withdrawing from Iraq. I have attended funerals of Oregon soldiers killed by roadside bombs due to inadequately armored vehicles. I have visited soldiers in the hospital who were gravely injured due to inadequate armor. I've sat with grieving mothers and dads who shared their concerns and loss. I just participated in the deployment ceremony for the 850 members of the Oregon National Guard deployed to Afghanistan, a mission I fully support funding. I will not walk away from these and other volunteers serving our country in the military. Although I did not support the war in Iraq and believe our troops should come home this year, as long as they are deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, I will not vote to cut off vital supplies and benefits. For example, HR 4939 included: $465.9 million in additional body armor; $890 million for new up-armored Humvees; nearly $2 billion to procure and develop countermeasures against roadside bombs; $850 million over the president's request to make sure National Guard units deploying and troops currently in the field have upgraded vehicles; and nearly $10 billion in bonus pay for troops and enhanced benefits in the event of death or traumatic injury. While the letter writer may not care about ensuring our troops have adequate protective equipment and the benefits they've earned and deserve, I do. In addition, the bill included $300 million to sustain the African Peacekeeping force in Darfur and to transition to a U.N. force and $66.290 million to meet humanitarian needs in Darfur. Apparently the letter writer believes Darfur refugees do not deserve aid and protection and that I should have voted against this critical funding. I disagree. HR 4939 included several billion dollars for Hurricane Katrina victims to construct houses, repair levees, improve flood control, restore wetlands and ensure local governments can fund essential services. Apparently the letter writer believes that the government's obligation to the residents of the Gulf Coast has ended and that I should have voted against this critical funding. I disagree. The bill also included an amendment that for the first time established a U.S. policy against permanent military bases in Iraq. Perhaps the letter writer thinks it isn't important for the U.S. to set a policy against permanent bases in Iraq. I think it is important. As long as the Republicans control the Congress and set the rules — control that will hopefully end after this fall's election — they will meld critical humanitarian aid, essential funding for our troops and disaster aid into one take-it-or-leave-it package without ever giving members the opportunity to vote on a real bill, like Rep. Murtha's, to end our involvement in Iraq without undermining our troops. While I remain opposed to the war in Iraq, HR 4939 funded too many important things for me to vote against it. You can be assured, however, that I will continue my outspoken efforts to bring our troops home in 2006. Peter DeFazio is a member of Congress representing Oregon's District 4.
		Table of Contents | News | Views | Calendar| Film | Music | Culture | Classifieds | Personals | Contact | EW Archive | Advertising Information | Current Issue |