Statements on Iraq Escalation Plan

Originally published by Ron Gunzburger on Politics1.com

President Bush's plan to send an additional 21,500 US soldiers to Iraq -- touted as a "surge" strategy to gain control on the ground -- has prompted some unexpected stances from legislators on both sides of the aisle on Capitol Hill. Frankly, I'm fascinated by the willingness of legislators -- R and D alike -- to break with their party leadership on this key issue. Last week we mentioned how US Senators Sam Brownback (R-KS), Susan Collins (R-ME), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), Norm Coleman (R-MN) and Gordon Smith (R-OR) and Congressman Jerry Moran (R-KS) announced their opposition to the surge. Hagel called it "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam." US Senator Joe Lieberman (Independent Dem-CT), by contrast, strongly supports the surge plan as "necessary." Since then, here are more who are openly breaking with their party leaders:

Republicans against the "surge"

--Congressman Ric Keller (R-FL): "The American people have paid the ultimate price for this war, and now is not the time to escalate the tragedy even further";
--Congressman Mark Kirk (R-IL): "I advised against the proposed troop surge. The best way forward for the United States in the Middle East is to assemble a diplomatic surge that far exceeds any troop surge";
--Congressman Vern Buchanan (R-FL): "It's not about Democrats and Republicans -- it's about doing what's right";
--Congresswoman Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL): "It's too little, too late";
--Congressman Mac Thornberry (R-TX): "I am not interested in sending in more troops just to have more boots on the ground. I am not interested in doing more of what has not been working";
--Congressman Charles Boustany (R-LA): "This proposal is a military solution to an internal, political problem";
--Congressman Tim Johnson (R-IL): "It is not in the best interest of our country to contribute additional troops to this war ... The primary goal [should be] to bring our troops home as quickly and safely as possible";
--Congressman Jim Ramstad (R-MN): The surge "would be counterproductive";
--Congressmen Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD), Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), Howard Coble (R-NC), Walter Jones (R-NC) and Ron Paul (R-TX) co-signed a letter to President Bush urging him to "reject any ... short or long term increase in the number of U.S. troops";
--Congresswoman Heather Wilson (R-NM): "It is not vital to America that Iraq be able to defend itself from outside powers";
--Congressman Jimmy Duncan (R-TN): "I think that this is a desperate attempt to turn around what was an unfortunate policy in the first place. It really sounds just like a continuation of the failed policies of the past four years"; and
--Congressman Jim Walsh (R-NY): "No increased amount of American military power can force the Iraqi people to work out their differences."

Democrats supporting the President's plan

--Congressman Jim Marshall (D-GA): "It is something that can be done and can help"; and
--Congressman John Barrow (D-GA) isn't sure the surge is a good idea but will vote for funding for the additional troops, saying it would be "irresponsible and dangerous" to oppose it.

US Senators Dick Lugar (R-IN), Richard Shelby (R-AL), Jim Bunning (R-KY), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Arlen Specter (R-PA), Larry Craig (R-ID), David Vitter (R-LA), Pete Domenici (R-NM), George Voinovich (R-OH) and a significant number of House Republicans expressed skepticism and said they remained undecided on the proposal. Several Democrats -- including Congressmen Chet Edwards (D-TX) and Henry Cuellar (D-TX) -- said they were against the surge, but would still support adequate funding for it if the President pushes forward on his escalation plan.

Congressman Virgil Goode (R-VA) supports the surge, but opposes the President's plan to spend $1 billion in additional funds to rebuild Iraq's economy to promote political stability "until a like amount is appropriated for rebuilding the economy of [my] District, which saw its anchor [textile] industries disappear because" of free trade treaties.