FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Latest Betrayal by Senate Democrats

by JOHN V. WALSH

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

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

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

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

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

JOHN V. WALSH can be reached at John.Endwar@gmail.com.

 

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

Weekend Edition
May 06, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Dave Wagner
When Liberals Run Out of Patience: the Impolite Exile of Seymour Hersh
John Stauber
Strange Bedfellows: the Bizarre Coalition of Kochs, Neocons and Democrats Allied Against Trump and His #FUvoters
Rob Urie
Hillary Clinton and the End of the Democratic Party
Joshua Frank
Afghanistan: Bombing the Land of the Snow Leopard
Bill Martin
Fear of Trump: Annals of Parliamentary Cretinism
Doug Johnson Hatlem
NYC Board of Elections Suspends 2nd Official, Delays Hillary Clinton v. Bernie Sanders Results Certification
Carol Miller
Pretending the Democratic Party Platform Matters
Paul Street
Hey, Bernie, Leave Them Kids Alone
Tamara Pearson
Mexico Already Has a Giant Wall, and a Mining Company Helped to Build It
Paul Craig Roberts
Somnolent Europe, Russia, and China
Dave Lindorff
Bringing the Sanders ‘Revolution’ to Philly’s Streets
Margaret Kimberley
Obama’s Last Gasp Imperialism
Carmelo Ruiz
The New Wave of Repression in Puerto Rico
Jack Denton
Prison Labor Strike in Alabama: “We Will No Longer Contribute to Our Own Oppression”
Jeffrey St. Clair
David Bowie’s 100 Favorite Books, the CounterPunch Connection
David Rosen
Poverty in America: the Deepening Crisis
Pepe Escobar
NATO on Trade, in Europe and Asia, is Doomed
Pete Dolack
Another Goodbye to Democracy if Transatlantic Partnership is Passed
Carla Blank
Prince: Pain and Dance
Gabriel Rockhill
Media Blackout on Nuit Debout
Barry Lando
Welcome to the Machine World: the Perfect Technological Storm
Hilary Goodfriend
The Wall Street Journal is Playing Dirty in El Salvador, Again
Frank Stricker
Ready for the Coming Assault on Social Security? Five Things Paul Ryan and Friends Don’t Want You to Think About
Robert Gordon
Beyond the Wall: an In-Depth Look at U.S. Immigration Policy
Roger Annis
City at the Heart of the Alberta Tar Sands Burning to the Ground
Simon Jones
RISE: New Politics for a Tired Scotland
Rob Hager
After Indiana: Sanders Wins another Purple State, But Remains Lost in a Haze of Bad Strategy and Rigged Delegate Math
Howard Lisnoff
Father Daniel Berrigan, Anti-war Hero With a Huge Blindspot
Adam Bartley
Australia-China Relations and the Politics of Canberra’s Submarine Deal
Nyla Ali Khan
The Complexity of the Kashmir Issue: “Conflict Can and Should be Handled Constructively
Josh Hoxie
American Tax Havens: Elites Don’t Have to go to Panama to Hide Their Money–They’ve Got Delaware
Ramzy Baroud
The Spirit of Nelson Mandela in Palestine: Is His Real Legacy Being Upheld?
Alli McCracken - Raed Jarrar
#IsraelSaudi: A Match Made in Hell
George Wuerthner
Working Wilderness and Other Code Words
Robert Koehler
Cowardice and Exoneration in Kunduz
Ron Jacobs
Psychedelic Rangers Extraordinaire
Missy Comley Beattie
It’s a Shit Show!
David Macaray
Our Best Weapon Is Being Systematically Eliminated
Colin Todhunter
Future Options: From Militarism and Monsanto to Gandhi and Bhaskar Save
Binoy Kampmark
The Trump Train Chugs Along
John Laforge
Dan Berrigan, 1921 – 2016: “We Haven’t Lost, Because We Haven’t Given Up.”
Tadeu Bijos
The Wants of Others
Norman Trabulsy Jr
John Denver and My 40th High School Reunion
Charles R. Larson
Being Gay in China, Circa 1987
David Yearsley
Skepticism, Irony, and Doubt: Williams on Bach
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail