Our Congressman Wavers On Iraq
Ulysses Democrats, I want to talk to you about Congressman Michael Arcuri. What did you send him to do in Washington, D.C.? Do you remember all the hopes you had for what he could accomplish as a member of a Democratic majority in Congress, in spite of his questionable politics?
Well, if you remember why you voted for Michael Arcuri, perhaps you could spare a moment today and remind Representative Arcuri why he got your vote. Probably, part of the reason Arcuri got your vote was because you thought he would vote to end the war in Iraq. With Arcuri’s talk on the campaign trail, I certainly can understand how you would get that impression.
You may be disappointed to hear then, that MoveOn has identified Representative Mike Arcuri as one of the Democrats who is “wavering” on whether to vote to end the Iraq War.
“Dick Cheney and his allies in Congress are on an all-out assault—saying that Democrats are “undermining the troops” by trying to end the war.1 And some Democrats are wavering.
Can you call Rep. Arcuri and tell him that you want our troops home safely this year? They won’t vote until next week so we still have time to affect the final plan and your call could make all the difference.
Congressman Michael Arcuri
Phone: 202-225-3665″
Yes, it seems that Congressman Arcuri is actually considering siding with the Republicans, against the Democrats, on some key votes that would end the Iraq War.
Give Arcuri some backbone. If you voted for Michael Arcuri last November, give him a call, and tell him what you want him to do about Iraq.
Correction on earlier note: The House Appropriations Committee, not the full House of Representatives, voted on this legislation today. Michael Arcuri is not on the House Appropriations Committee. He, along with the rest of the House of Representatives, will have the chance to vote on the legislation next week.
Would like more solid info before I decide whether to be disappointed in “MoveOn.org” or Arcuri, neither, or both. There are, as I understand it, a number of approaches, and several bills, under consideration.
I did vote (and campaign) for Arcuri because I thought it was important to end the war (although that’s a tricky thing to do from Congress, and requires serious study on the “how”). As a currently-underemployed person (and one really interested in economic development), I also voted for him to revive our economy, so that I would not have to take my thesis advisor’s advice and move to another state to find a professional positon. And, I voted for him to take a Red seat out and give the Democrats control of Congress (that was a squeaker, too). I was really pleasantly surprised to see how rapidly Mike was able to gain power in Congress– a recent ranking of Congressional power (see http://www.congress.org/congressorg/power_rankings/state.tt?state=NY) placed him at a rank of 165 (out of 439 members- 1 is most powerful). That was pretty dang good for somebody who just got there, I thought– he moved directly to the middle of the pack of the NYS delegation, too– zooming past people who had been there for years, like, say, Nydia Velazquez. I’d like to see Mike keep that power, and use it both to end the war, and to do things that help his district (which includes some areas not nearly as prosperous and fortunate as Ulysses).
It’s more important to me that Mike be in good standing with his party leadership and constituents, than that he please whomever it is that establishes the Move0n.org agenda on specific bills, or reflect the political stance of Ulysses above that of the less well-off and demanding people in places like Whitney Point, Cortland and Utica. Don’t get me wrong– I made phone calls for MoveOn this past election, went to one of their parties, etc. But, I know that they don’t do much in the way of detailed local research, and that they articulate a position to the left of most of the people who voted Mike Arcuri into office. Not to the left of most people in Ulysses, perhaps… but, not even sure there.
Soooo… I guess I am thinking that my approach would be to at least listen to the staffer explain Mike’s stand on these bills when I call to inquire. I, unlike many folks in Ulysses, don’t know everything. I’ll surely march for peace, and tell my Congressman how important ending the war fast is to me (again). But, I probably won’t just repeat the MoveOn script– I am, alas, a lousy soldier in any Army, ‘cuz I just can’t help making up my own mind about things. Mike’s contact info is at http://arcuri.house.gov/ (incl. additional district office phone ##s if you can’t get through to the DC one because so many MoveOn folks from around the country are calling it)– do call him; you decide whether you want that call to be a dialogue, or just another cookie-cutter demand from a MoveOn-bot.
He’s really starting to piss me off.
You know, Krys, this isn’t just another cookie-cutter demand from a MoveOn bot.
I’ve been pestering Arcuri about Iraq for about a year now – starting with his campaign-long refusal to explain what position he took on the Iraq War back in 2002 and 2003, when it really counted. Arcuri never answered that question, and I’ll bet you can figure out why.
Arcuri’s supposed “power” comes from his affiliation with power-broker Rahm Emanuel, who hand-picked Arcuri for the Democratic nomination last year, and managed to intimidate the other candidates into dropping out, so that local Democrats wouldn’t have any say at all in who their own candidate would be. That anti-democratic move is a large part of why I re-registered as an independent voter. What’s the point of being in a political party that doesn’t allow the chance to have a say?
Arcuri’s power exists at the whim of Rahm Emanuel, and the Blue Dog Democrats, a Republican-leaning caucus. He’s a death penalty supporter, and favors the Military Commissions Act, too. Hardly someone that represents the values most Ulysses Democrats believe in.
Besides, Krys, isn’t it true that Arcuri hasn’t supported ANY legislation that would give us a definite end to the war in Iraq?
Show me the bill, if I’m wrong about that.
Kyrs and Jonathan,
I think you’re both making good arguments here. I wrote an op ed in the Ithaca Journal asking Arcuri to write and tell us where he stood on the Military Commissions Act, and he dodged the question. It’s hard to know where he stands on critical life and death issues, and that is unacceptable.
It’s also hard to get a decent picture of the bills in congress right now. I don’t even know the name or number of this bill that, I guess I want him to vote for. It’s a funding bill to which they amended something to set a hard date for troops out? WTF? Can anyone recommend a website that explains upcoming bills from a progressive point of view?
I guess I’ll call and just say “get out now” but I wish I could be better informed.
Thanks, Allen.
Iraq is a bloody mess, and I dearly wish we were not fighting amongst ourselves about how the Congress could fix it (which, honestly, I’m not convinced they can). I spent a fair amount of time unsuccessfully looking for the bill ##, too. Also have called Arcuri’s office to say pretty much the same thing you did. Did speak directly to Dan Lamb, Maurice Hinchey’s aide, who said that, as he understands it, the primary threat to this current, Pelosi bill (w/amendment from Reid? Is that it?) is a group of liberal House Dems, who are threatening to not vote for it based on it not being strict enough on removing troops and/or not prohibiting invading Iran. That is backed up at http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/mar/14/move_on where it says that MoveOn is now trying to get the bill changed (yesterday post) and quotes the Director of MoveOn as saying they have not decided their position on the bill (which explains me not finding it on their site or in my in-box).
OK, so, this really is complicated. To me, when a Congressman refuses to take a hard and fast position on a really complicated issue, that does not suggest spinelessness, but, rather, subtlety and savvy and cautiousness. Johnathan has emailed me about a military commissions bill that I did not follow, and don’t know how Arcuri voted on. I really can’t, and don’t, keep up with everything. Johnathan does not like Mike; so far, I do, although I think he is to the right of me politically. I think he would have lost the election if he wasn’t, however.
As far as the involvement of the Blue Dogs… I guess I think that is part and parcel of the nationalizing of local politics (a.k.a. MoveOn), which I try to counteract by staying involved in local politics, which can also be complex, fractious, and a pain.
Jonathan,
This mercurial (or is it “Arcurial”) decision to become a so-called “independent” (independent of MoveOn too?) is fine for local politics. But if you plan to have any real effect on national issues as an independent, dream on. Commit yourself to the Democratic party, recognize that it includes a rich spectrum of reasonable people who sometimes disagree with each other, temper your breathless one-issue orientation, and you’ll feel a lot happier with your ability to influence things. My own reference point for choosing up sides is always the “Christian” right and the big business dinosaurs who completely dominate the Republicans. I may sometimes disagree with fellow Democrats, but I’d never even think about abandoning them on the national scene given the current alternative.
Richard,
When was the last time the New York State presidential primary for the Democrats had a decisive input to the process? How about for Senator? Can you remember the last time that the 24th District Democrats had a primary for a candidate for the House of Representatives? Do you really think there will, with Hillary Clinton running for President, be a meaningful presidential primary in New York in 2008? Every year, it’s one thing, and then another, for an excuse to deprive Democratic voters of the chance to have a choice.
In 2006, we were told that, for our own good, Democratic voters shouldn’t have the chance to elect our own candidate, but should just take Arcuri because he was picked by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the national organization for the House of Representatives in the Democratic Party. That’s abusive.
When the Democratic Party works to deprive me of the right to vote in a Democratic Party primary, then they best vote I can take is to leave the Democratic Party.
What have the Democrats in Congress done to bring Bush under control? Not much. What have they done to repeal the Military Commissions Act? Nothing at all. I don’t feel any guilt about abandoning the Democrats because they abandoned the issues that I care about a long time ago. They do a lot of talking, and take little action, and keep on playing into the Republicans hands.
It’s not one issue. It’s multiple issues that the Democrats keep on getting wrong. But let’s talk about one of the most important issues that the Democrats are getting wrong: The Military Commissions Act
Krys, the Military Commissions Act is not just some little thing. The New York Times editorial board has referred to this law as our generation’s version of the Alien and Sedition Acts.
Here’s what the Military Commissions Act has done:
* It revokes habeas corpus, thereby giving the power to imprison people without trial for as long as the President likes
* It gives George W. Bush and other top officials legal amnesty for any war crimes he may have committed
* It legalizes torture
* It creates a secret committee controlled by the President that can declare anyone to be an enemy, and thereby strip away their legal rights guaranteed by the Constitution
* It ends protection of prisoners of war by the Geneva Conventions
* It removes the right to a speedy trial
* It sets up absurd kangaroo courts that fail to meet the most fundamental civilized standards of justice, with unfair trials kept hidden from the American public
Last autumn, Michael Arcuri stated over and over again that he thought that the Military Commissions Act was a great idea. Now that he’s in Congress, Arcuri has done NOTHING to counter any of the dangerous aspects of the Military Commissions Act.
You know what? Most other Democrats haven’t done anything about the law either. They worry about looking soft. I think that they look soft on liberty.
Why shouldn’t I abandon the Democrats, when they won’t stand up for the most basic civil liberties guaranteed by our Constitution?
Well–
Have received an email back on Arcuri’s stand on bringing the troops home quickly. Never heard him speak on military commissions (I’m understanding now that Jonathan is referring to a bill passed before Mike was in Congress, which he is angry that this Freshman has not overturned in his first 3 months…). Source?
Here’s today’s press release– don’t know where Blue Dogs, MoveOn, local Dems or even I stand on this bill. See you at the peace march.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CONTACT: Marion Read
March 15, 2007 202-225-3665
ARCURI: ‘RETURN TROOPS SAFELY,RESPONSIBLY AND AS SOON AS POSSIBLE’
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Michael A. Arcuri (D-Utica) outlined his strong support for The U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Health, and Iraq Accountability Act which would provide our troops with the equipment they need, require Iraqis to take control of their own country, establish benchmarks for withdrawal from Iraq, and help fight the war on terror in Afghanistan. The bill will provide $2.8 billion for veterans’ and troops’ health care.
“For months, I’ve said that our country needs a plan for how to achieve the necessary objectives to ensure the timely redeployment of our troops out of Iraq. The previous Congress failed in their duty to provide oversight and refused to ask the tough questions about how this war was being managed,” said Arcuri.
“The U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Health, and Iraq Accountability Act for the first time lays out a responsible and realistic strategy for completing our mission in Iraq and bringing our brave troops home as soon as possible. This is a responsible and deliberate plan to change the direction in Iraq without jeopardizing the safety and wellbeing of our soldiers.
“I was sent to Washington to stand up against the mismanagement of this war. My constituents want our servicemen and women home-safely, responsibly, and as soon as possible.
“In the 70 days since this Congress was sworn in, we’ve conducted 97 hearings on the war in Iraq-to get the answers the American public deserves. We are holding, and will continue to hold, the Administration accountable for the war.”
The U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Health, and Iraq Accountability Act:
* Establishes a clear strategy for withdrawal of U.S. forces in Iraq with real benchmarks and real consequences, requiring the Iraqi government to meet fundamental security, political and economic benchmarks established by the President by July 2007.
* Ensures that our troops have the tools and resources they need to do the job they have been asked to do. At a time when soldiers and their families have been asked to sacrifice through multiple tours in Iraq, this legislation honors their service by prohibiting the deployment of troops who are not fully trained, equipped and protected.
* Keeps our promise to veterans by providing $2.8 billion for health care for troops and veterans. We owe it to the brave men and women who have sacrificed for their country to provide them the care they need and deserve when they come home.
* Increases funding to fight the global war on terrorism and ensure that our homeland is safe and secure.
No, Krys. Michael Arcuri declared his support for the Military Commissions Act during his campaign, not just during the last three months. I expect a Democrat not to support revoking habeas corpus and most of the Bill of Rights. Is that so much to ask for?
Arcuri can do something easy on the Military Commissions Act. Add his co-sponsorship to a bill that amends or repeals it. Not much work to that, is there? He can just have his aides talk to another representative’s aides. Less than half a day’s work. But, Arcuri hasn’t done it.
Don’t let Arcuri’s claims about action on Iraq obscure this fact: Arcuri is not supporting the effort to the war, just benchmarks for fighting the war more effectively. That’s George W. Bush’s position. Bush says he has a strategy with benchmarks for ending the war and bringing the troops home, just like Arcuri.
The time for establishing benchmarks was three years ago. The time for ending the war is now.
Maybe you disagree with me on that. Michael Arcuri clearly does. So, maybe he represents you well, but he doesn’t represent me well at all.
Jonathan,
First you became an “independent” because N.Y. Democrats conspired to run that awful “Blue Dog” Arcuri for Congress. Now, it’s because Democrats, all Democrats apparently, are “soft on liberty”? Really? That’s an awful lot of very good people you’re willing to flame, Jonathan. I’m proud to say I’m a Democrat from New York. Hillary, Chuck, and Elliott look very good to me compared to the state-wide lineup in virtually every other state in the country. Which state would you trade that slate with, Jonathan? If Hillary ends up being the Democratic nominee for President, I’ll be happy, I’ll campaign for her, I might even go to D.C. for the inauguration if she wins. Will I agree with her on every issue? No, but that’s ok because we’ll agree most of the time. Our core values match up pretty well. Maybe you can’t see it from your insular coffee-clutch here in T-burg, but the 24th District is a conservative upstate district. That Arcuri won is and was a big deal, just like it was a big deal for Democrats to win in a bunch of similar districts around the country. I won’t make my membership in the Democratic party hinge on his or any Democrat’s ability to satisfy me on every issue. That isn’t the way it works. It’s ok for reasonable people to disagree Jonathan. It really is. Everything is not a conspiracy.
“A Conspiracy!†cried the delighted lady, clapping her hands. “Of all things, I do like a Conspiracy! It’s so interesting!†Lewis Carroll
Richard,
I am struggling to find the place where I said that all Democrats are soft on liberty, as you said I have done. Gosh, I can’t find it.
What I DID say: “Most other Democrats haven’t done anything about the law [Military Commissions Act] either. They worry about looking soft. I think that they look soft on liberty.”
You know what? Most Democrats in Congress haven’t done anything about the Military Commissions Act. That’s a matter that is documented by the Library of Congress. Are you challenging that fact?
When did I say that everything is a conspiracy, Richard?
Your way of putting words in my mouth isn’t very honest. In fact, it’s rather rude.
I never said that I became independent just because of one issue. It’s a collection of failures, over and over again, and a dramatic lack of democratic process within the party, that have led me to leave the Democratic Party. The Military Commissions Act is just the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
If you want to insult T-burg as insular, and coffee-clutch, go ahead, Richard. Go ahead and insult Trumansburg. Is that going to help Michael Arcuri win trust? Is that kind of attitude going to convince people that the Democrats are worthy of support?
If you think it’s okay for reasonable people to disagree, why are you so upset when I say that I disagree with you about the general direction of the Democratic Party?
I support Democrats when they do the right thing, and I oppose them when they do the right thing. I disagree with Michael Arcuri’s Blue Dog Democrat right wing politics. If it’s okay for reasonable people to disagree, why can’t you handle my disagreement?
[...] Yesterday, I wrote that Representative Arcuri was an opponent of the legislation. Today, I’m happy to say that Representative Arcuri has relented from his previous opposition. He has now agreed to vote in favor of ending the war in Iraq. [...]
Jonathan,
Sorry if I hit a nerve there. By the way, I think I might be able to be persuaded to take the Massachusetts slate of Kennedy, Kerry, and Patrick in trade for New York’s current slate of Clinton, Shumer and Spitzer. Illinois might also be in the running with Durbin, Obama, and Blagojevich. Any other states you’d like to offer up? How about Connecticut, which sports one of your own . . . someone who gave up their Democratic party membership to become an “independent” — Joe Lieberman.
There are all kinds of independents. I’m my own kind. That’s what independence is all about – a point that people who try to identify a mythical coherent “independent vote” usually miss.
I’d take Wisconsin’s Feingold, though I need to know a bit more about Senator Herb Kohl.
Yep, and there’s no “I” in Democrat, something Lieberman clearly didn’t/doesn’t understand.
Feingold and Kohl are nice choices, both fine and loyal Wisconsin Democrats. And if you add in Wisconsin’s Democratic governor Doyle, the group matches up pretty well with New York’s all-star cast of Clinton, Schumer, and Spitzer. Well done, but that Massachusetts set is pretty tough to beat, don’t you think?