Tell Congress to Stand Up to Bush

To briefly catch you up on what's gone down: Last November, Democrats were voted into control of both chambers of Congress running on a platform of beginning troop withdrawals from Iraq immediately (as in upon their ascendancy to control of Congress in January). Then, after the election was already over, they quietly removed the withdrawal tenet from their First 100 Hours Agenda. Four months after the beginning of the 110th Congress, we now have 30,000 more troops in Iraq. It took the Democratic leadership in Congress over two months to even begin considering binding legislation on Iraq at all. About a week ago, Congress finally passed the first ever binding legislation that even mildly challenged Bush's position on the war: it required that combat troops begin to be withdrawn from Iraq by October (a far cry from the Democratic Party's original January pledge) and imposed non-binding deadline for the completion of the withdrawal of the combat troops (which do not include all troops and contractors, but rather only about 50% of the troops), in addition to giving Bush more than all of his $100 billion request in war funding and passing his next budget, which quietly extends war funding into 2009. Confident that they had taken a real stand for peace, the Democrats in Congress held a celebration last Tuesday (May 1st). Only short hours later, President Bush held a press conference announcing he had vetoed Congress's fulfillment of his war funding request, brilliantly explaining that Democrats were responsible for his actions. In light of this new development, House Speaker Pelosi led the charge in declaring that "The president wants a blank check. The Congress is not going to give it to him."...right before announcing her intention to seek further compromise. One might wonder exactly how any further compromise is possible, considering how non-restraining the legislation already sent to Mr. Bush's desk was. One possibility that comes to mind is that of making the date by which troops must begin to withdraw non-binding as well. Congress is set to begin the debate over a new war funding bill immediately and may send the president a new one as early as this next week. This is where you come in.

John Edwards, anticipating this scenario, has recently authored a petition. His petition calls on your representatives in Congress to vote against anything but a binding timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. That is hardly an unduly demanding expectation. To send this message to Congress, the Edwards petition requires 100,000 signatures in the immediate future, as in before a vote is held on any new war funding bill, which, as I mentioned above, could happen as early as this upcoming week. With two-thirds of the American public in favor of establishing a binding timeline for withdrawal from Iraq, there is clearly sufficient support out there for such a petition to succeed. But this is a race against the clock. Please sign this petition now and urge your friends to sign as well. Moreover, I urge you to please add a comment to your signature specifically stating that you expect your Congresspeople to vote against any bill that provides more money for the war. This is very urgent! Please add your signature now! Thank you for supporting peace.