Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- When You're Cutting Social Security, 'Wealthy' Begins at $25K
- With Little More Than a Note, Obama Deploys US Troops To Niger
- Stripped of 'Country of Origin' Label, US Agrees to Sell Tear Gas to Egypt
- The 'Land of 10,000 Lakes' Is Running Dry
- 5 Reasons Why the Keystone XL Pipeline is Bad for the Economy
Popular content
Today's Top News
Time to Repeal Congress' Blank Check on Wars
Following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Congress passed a joint resolution broadly authorizing the president to use "all necessary and appropriate force" against those involved in attacking our nation and to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States. I was the only member of Congress who voted against the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force" because I knew some would use it as a blank check to wage war anywhere around the world. It is safe to say that if we knew at the time what the next decade would bring, I would not have been alone.
In the nine years since Congress passed this authorization, the United States has waged two wars at a cost of more than $1 trillion. Afghanistan has now become the longest war in our history - longer than World War II or the Vietnam war. Estimates for the total direct and indirect costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq by their end range from $5 trillion to $7 trillion with more than 5,700 Americans having given their lives in these conflicts. As we watch an increasing number of lives lost abroad and jobs lost at home, it is clear we cannot accept a policy of open-ended war without accepting a less prosperous, less secure country for ourselves and future generations. Every additional dollar invested in war is a dollar we take away from much-needed investments in health care, education, infrastructure and clean energy that will preserve and create high-quality jobs, as well as ensure America's future competitiveness.
Unfortunately, my prediction that the broad 2001 authorization would open a Pandora's box has come true - and not just in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Domestically, civil rights advocates have challenged the legality of the National Security Agency's warrantless electronic surveillance and wiretapping activities. The detention center at Guantanamo Bay, operated under the pretext of "all necessary and appropriate force," continues to symbolize our eroding constitutional values. United Nations officials have expressed concern over lack of accountability within U.S. intelligence-run targeted killing operations, most notably drone strikes and related civilian casualties. Further, U.S. involvement or tacit backing of military operations in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere shows that an indefinite pursuit of loosely defined global targets is opening the door to war without end. All this, and more, started with that fateful vote on Sept. 14, 2001. Encouragingly, we are hearing bipartisan calls both inside and outside Congress that America cannot afford, nor is it in our long-term national security interest, to wage endless war around the world. As long as the expansive mandate of the 2001 authorization remains in force, the politics of "victory" may result in an ever-growing U.S. military commitment.
Correcting mistakes begins with accepting them. So I have introduced bipartisan legislation for Congress to sunset and repeal the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force" over a six-month period.
This legislation is not a referendum on any one U.S. operation, whether in Afghanistan, Iraq, or elsewhere. The repeal of the act is about Congress restoring its constitutional prerogative in determining and defining the commitments of our country while at war. Anything less does a disservice to our military service members, our nation, and our democracy.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
40 Comments so far
Show AllThank you Barbara Lee. Better late than never I suppose.
Did you also vote against the USA Unpatriot Act?
Hallelujah!! The spirit of progressive, principled black politics survives even in the Age of Obama.
We are most likely too late to save our country from the complete and total looting of its wealth and prosperity. We have traded it in on a bloated MIC which has become exactly what President Eisenhower warned us against in his Farewell Address.
His wish which was that "democracy would survive for all generations to come" has been ignored and traded in for what he warned us against -- becoming "the insolvent phantom of tomorrow."
Good points Frank, however, doesn't "trade in" mean that both parties get something of value out of the deal.
Although I have seen a lot of theft and extortion by and on behalf of the MIC during the past 50 years, I and most other working class Americans are still waiting to get something out of one of these deals.
YOU were alone on sept.14 vote, as you are ALONE to this day. The congress won't repeal AUMF, they are still driven today as they were on 9/11/01.
whocares;)
Public Law 107-40.
I have continually ranted that this is the law that must be addressed, if we are to escape the insane madness of forever war to 'prevent future terrorism'.
Public Law 107-40. End the authorization that allows the President to announce to us who the enemy is.
End the authorization that allows the President to send the US military anywhere, against anyone.
End the authorization that allows the President to target us, because after all, everyone is a potential future terrorist.
Public Law 107-40. Do something about it or admit that you don't really care.
I've said this a bazillion times. Hopefully some day I can stop repeating myself.
Thanks to Barbara Lee. Now, how about thanks to you?!
While I, too, hope you can soon stop repeating yourself, I encourage you to continue as long as it takes to repeal the undemocratic, authoritarian, imperialistic AUMF.
We need many more voices such as yours.
We need a true Workers Party, which, by its very definition, would oppose all wars because they always pit workers against workers solely for the benefit of the Ruling Class which never fights wars but always profits from them.
We need something which seems impossible: a Congress which acts to put principles of conscience above greed and power-lust.
you are right all the way. a workers party that could work in coalition with the green party. it would be a real alternative to the corporate dim party.
matt
galveston tx
Americans are being played by their politicians. There is no chance that this legislation will pass. Big money and the military will not support it. They would rather crap their own nests than end this nightmare.
Dear youth of America,
Put away your damn iPods and PAY ATTENTION!
Sincerely,
Concerned Citizen
Some just stream video online and think that equals giving up tv. Like those who trade their cigarettes for chew and pat themselves on the back on how they quit smoking.
"People in this country have been bought off with gizmos and toys and no one questions things anymore."
-George Carlin
Or Podcast Thom Hartmann and Randi Rhodes
I couldn't find any reference to this bill on Lee's website or Thomas -- Congress's legislation server or on the web in general.
I'd like to know who the "bipartisan" supporters are.
Likely upcoming; likely Ron Paul.
Would someone kindly explain to me exactly how the ongoing U.S. activities in other lands differ from those of the Nazis and their massacres in Spain (Guernica) and Poland (Lidice). Admittedly, the Nazis, lacking remotely controlled drones at the time, were forced to be slightly more intimate with some of their victims, but the "collateral damage" certainly appears quite similar, as does the results of "targeted" murders.
Rove utilized Hitler's playbook to organize Team Dubya and Rahm utilized Rove's playbook to organize Teak Obama. Fascism perfected !
Obama lived in Indonesia when Suharto was the USG installed military dictatorship there. Ed Rollins, former RNC chairman was asked the question "why do the Repubican Party rally's use the NAZI tactics at its gatherings" to which Rollins replied if the tactics worked for the NAZI's they[NAZI tactics] will work for us[Repubican Party] why wouldn't we use them", It was an impromptu interview in the mid 90's middle of the day broadcast out of Greenville, S.C. It took about a minute and the interviewer was flabbergasted as was I. I didn't have pencil and paper handy enough to write down the particulars.
RV I don't see the difference. Except that we are more distanced geographically and spiritually. Most of us do not have to look at it.
Joe
This act was Bush, Cheney & Co's wet dream. Armageddon started out as a sick, twisted mentally ill person's dream, look how far that has gotten us as a species. A new consciousness of thoughts of peace, sharing, compassion and cooperation must overcome the old, worn out war mentality. Repeal the blank check, stop making war, NOW!
String bean: I am with you 100% on this issue.
as I've said before there are cable shows
devoted to the coming conflagration, a fake
christian news program and the jack van impe
'crock' which both proselytize for armageddon
blatantly. Their main theme is in support of
GODS CHOSEN TRIBE you guessed it, the Likud
and their spear tip the HASIDDIC settlers.
I'm willing to bet We AMERICANS tax dollars
are CUT-OUT through Israel and returned to USA
to pay for this lick-spittle swine palaver.
The ultimate IRONY is when we pay for our own
PROPAGANDIZING.
Van Imp a total nut case, uses the public air ways and is likely Tax exempt and he want to overthrow the USG by destroying the world.The USG doesn't have to fear external enemies, they are domestic and funded by the taxpayers they want to destroy.
Mary McDonald, while deliriously ill in Scotland, 1830. The rapture doctrine, never gained a foothold in Britain so it was imported into the USA.
thank you barbara lee for your effort, however little chance your effort may have.
the question for us at CD is,
is each of us, who call ourselves progressive, doing our very best too to
live the alternative ideas that we preach, and
spread the alternative ideas to the non-believers every chance we get, with patience and persistence?
Thank you, Congresswoman Lee, for your bright light in a dull Congress.
How can I not have hope with you in Congress?
Good comment, curiousteve. That's how I feel, though the alternative ideas of a few progressives may be too little and too late.
Hope mixed with realpolitik, eh?
Bill in Dubuque
"how can I not have hope..."
I guess I'll just say...Read my MIND!
or see comments under flanders, or 'IKE'
no offense intended just, the paradox
of one out 435 is too immense. Well I like
dennis, and a few others... and in the senate
we have bernie and Al franken....I'm
so disgusted with leahy...We have a gov't of
apparatchiks...by design they enable. Bad cop
does the nastys, then good cop comes in and
makes it apparently NORMAL by not prosecuting
CRIMINAL policies of its predecessor cause that
would seem PARTISAN....not to mention Repugs
majority comes in and tears us a new one, then
Dims get a majority but OOPS those blue dogs
are really REPUGS in DIMS clothing....So the
Dims can't really get anything done without
compromising to the point of INERTIA.
WE ARE F*#Ked....
Thanks for your realist's assessment of matters, benningwentworth. No offense taken.
Apologies for unfounded optimism in my hopeful statement.
Common Dreams is partly to blame! I'd just finished reading Senator Bernie Sanders' Social Security statement, then I discovered Representative Barbara Lee's congressional proposal. Whoa! Two of my three favorite US politicians featured on the same day! The other is Dennis Kucinich! I guess I just sort of lost it, in my enthusiasm!
Still reading Common Dreams To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
Dear Rep. Lee,
Have been a fan of yours for some years, and appreciate your willingness to talk common sense rather than follow partisan lines.
Please - in our effort to bring a new narrative to the country, let us redefine defense. Since being against defense is open to the interpretation that one is "soft," let us redefine the meaning of defense so that we can all stay "strong."
Years ago I went through university with the help of a National Defense Student Loan. The interest was very low, and those government loans were given because it was in the nation's defense to have educated citizens.
It is also in our defense to have a strong infrastructure;
strong institutions such as schools, hospitals,libraries, parks, etc. Let's make this the "new defense" of our country, and call our soldiers home to lend a hand. After all, they are just idealistic young men who want to serve their country. All they need is to be pointed in the right direction.
Keep up your good work. Maybe someday people will see the wisdom of investing in peace - a Department of Peace.
Barbara Lee should be commended on her lone vote against the authorization for use of force after 9/11. But perhaps she would care to explain why, in September of last year, she failed to join 34 of her House colleagues in voting against HR 5522--which authorized funds for US operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, military aid to Israel and funding for the Colombian "anti-drug" war--and instead joined the majority in voting for it.
This is an important point about Barbara Lee's support for the war, Turbulo.
For those not familiar with the background, read this Counterpunch article, which states:
"First, Barbara Lee voted for the war funds. She represents Berkeley, California, and part of Oakland. Being from this heavily anti-war district, many anti-war activists assume she votes against all war funding bills. She has been a heroine-of-sorts of the anti-war movement for years."
http://www.counterpunch.org/vickrey07092010.html
The article refers to the last funding round voted by Congress for the Afghanistan war.
What's clear is that your Dem representative trades votes, but the Dems (like the Repugs) always ensure that the war funding gets passed. It's a means of disguising the fact that the Dem Party supports the wars - all of them. If you vote Dem, you vote for perpetual wars. It doesn't matter how "progressive" they may seem.
-TIA
We will never know the total number of civilians and soldiers who have died or had permanent injuries from the first gulf war against Iraq, the blockade against Iraq, the preemptive strike against Iraq, the occupation of Iraq, the war against Afghanistan, Pakistan, the drone attacks around the world, the prisoners who have died while in captivity, the innocent Muslims who are sentenced to 22 years in U.S. Federal prisons, human beings invisible to congress and the people of America who do not even know about them. No one knows the true impact of pain misery and death that our taxes and policies have dealt to innocent men women and children in America and around the world.
Thank you Barbara Lee for your wisdom and courage. I wish you success.
While we are at it,how about repealing immunity for damges caused by warrant less surveillance abuse.
How many Americans lives have been destroyed by false acusations,libel, slander,defamation of character.
Let the law suits fly, let Americans collect some of that contracted money that went to corporations that abuse the system for profit.
Imagine being followed 24-7 by right wing reliogus homophobes that want to taunt you into road rage or assault
.
Bleieve it, these lunatics exist in a form of communti watch groups, and your tax dollars pay for it.
Legal murder, that's what it is.
I see that most people here don't recall Barbara Lee's last vote IN SUPPORT of Afghanistan war funding.
See this article for background:
http://www.counterpunch.org/vickrey07092010.html
It's not clear why she voted for the war funding, given her comments in this essay and past actions. My guess is that she was compelled to do so by the Dem Party to save the war funding.
Of course, even if this resolution should pass, it's just symbolic and doesn't require action, such as withdrawal.
The War Powers Act already is in force, requiring the President to declare war 90 days after deploying forces, but it's never been enforced and the Supreme Court has ignored the law in the past. Technically, only Congress has the authority to declare war, per the Constitution. Congress has not done so with the current tri-front wars.
Face it, the Dems support the wars. And, may I ask, do you support the Dems (or Repugs)? If you do vote for those parties, should I call you "murderer" or just "ignorant"? Please write back and let me know which adjective you'd prefer.
-TIA
TIME TO REPEAL CONGRESS...except for barbara lee!!
Scott Hoton interviewed Lee for antiwar.com where she explains some of her votes. I didn't think her reasoning was sound but I have to give her the benefit of the doubt. At the height of America's bloodlust she said no. She probably had to stay off the streets because of all the death threats she got. All the other votes were really pointless after that... Once the war machine gets humming its all over.
War? We're at war? When did Congress declare war according to the Constitution? I thought we were just involved in military force. And how can W or O claim extraordinary war powers when war hasn't been declared? They aren't called "military force powers" for a reason.
Thank you, catcuspie, for injecting a bit of reality.
Barbara Lee, it is the deficit spending that funds the Pentagon/spy agencies as a regression analysis shows.It was Reagan that initiated the huge deficits and simultaneously the funding of the Pentagon/spy agencies increased, funded by the Federal deficit. The Simpson Cat Food Commission will of course never even consider the truth of the matters, that the Pentagon budget fueled by deficit spending is the threat to national security as declared by Admiral Mullen.This is what Walter Mondale exclaimed in 1984 when he referred to the insane arms race created by Reagan,The Pentagon is funded to prevent risks to national security and the Pentagon is the threat to national security because it is funded by the Treasury bond proceeds that fund the Federal deficit.