There must be more to the bill

http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/there-must-be-more-to-the-bill

Quotes of the Day: "The Democrats' failure to pass a troop funding bill that will actually get our armed forces the money they need is nothing less than a disgrace." -- House Minority Leader John Boehner, June, 2008

"It's going to be an interesting fall as Republicans try to explain their vote against legislation that they've described as funding for our troops in a time of war, because I'm confident their constituents will be reminded." - a White House Official, June 2009

Subject: There must be more to the bill

The Democrats are pro-war, the Republicans anti-war.

Don't believe me? Check the House roll call vote for the final version of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, which funds the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Just 5 Republicans were for it, and only 32 Democrats against.

What could me more convincing than that?

"But wait!" you will probably say, "There must be more to the story."

You're right of course. In fact, on May 14th there were 51 Democrats and only 9 Repubicans against the bill.

What happened?

As we noted two weeks ago, the bill was already loaded with extras that had nothing to do with the wars.

But when the Senate got their hands on it they added still more unrelated items . . .

* Funnelling billions of dollars to a failed, neo-colonial (i.e. "foreign aid") scheme called the International Monetary Fund
* The Graham-Lieberman measure, an amendment to the Freedom of Information Act to continue the coverup of the detainee abuse scandal

House Republicans wanted the IMF provisions stripped from the final bill, and the detainee abuse coverup retained. Instead, they got the exact opposite of what they wanted, and so they voted no, even though this meant they would not be "supporting the troops."

It's funny. Four years ago, Republicans supported the bill to "support the troops" even when Real ID was attached. Last year, they voted to "support the troops" even though the Democrats added $95 billion in domestic pork spending to it.

Why the change of heart now? Probably because a Democrat's in the White House. It's not "their" war anymore. As our quotes of the day demonstrate, charges of hypocrisy are flying fast and furious, and will likely continue for some time.

And it's all because Congress isn't living under the constraints of DownsizeDC.org's One Subject at a Time Act (OSTA), constraints that would do them, and the country, a lot of good. We ask you today to send a message insisting that Congress introduce and pass OSTA. Tell them . . .

* War spending should be dealt with in one bill, with no unrelated items added to it
* Aid to the IMF should be its own stand-alone bill
* Graham-Lieberman should be its own stand-alone bill

Tell Democrats that adding provisions to the war spending bill is disgraceful, and to atone they should introduce DownsizeDC.org's One Subject At A Time Act. Tell Republicans that if they don't introduce OSTA, they'll have no right to complain the next time similar stunts are pulled.

You can send your message at DownsizeDC.org's One Subject at a Time campaign page.

Thank you for being a part of the growing Downsize DC Army.

James Wilson
Assistant to the President
DownsizeDC.org