EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- How the US Turned Three Pacifists into Violent Terrorists
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Revealed: How US State Department 'Twists Arms' on Monsanto's Behalf
Popular content
Today's Top News
Will U.S. Mayors Vote Against War?
Senate Armed Services Chair Carl Levin—a Democrat from Michigan--had just put down the gavel, marking the end of the confirmation hearing for Leon Panetta to be the next Secretary of Defense, when Detroit-born CODEPINK activist Tighe Barry jumped up. “Shame on you, Senator Levin, for supporting endless wars while Detroit is dying,” he shouted. “Your constituents are eating cat food while you’re funding a champagne war.” Levin shook his head in disgust, dismissing Barry as some kind of kook, and walked out of the room.
But Barry’s words ring true. The city of Detroit stands as a mirror to the United States’ battered economy and failing wars. Our nation’s continued military exploits in Iraq and Afghanistan are fueling Detroit’s destruction. Taxpayers from Detroit shell out over two billion dollars a year for war, money that could cover healthcare for over 150,000 children or the payment of some 3,000 teachers’ salaries.
While Senator Levin might not want to make the link between war funding and the financial woes of our cities, mayors around the country are doing just that. At this year’s annual U.S. Conference of Mayors, to be held from June 17-21 in Baltimore, hundreds of mayors will gather to discuss diverse issues from job growth to homeland security. One of the issues they will vote on is the Bring Our War Dollars Home resolution, introduced by Mayor Kitty Piercy from Eugene, Oregon, which calls on Congress to redirect military spending to domestic priorities.
Thanks to the work of localgrassroots activists under the leadership of CODEPINK’s Bring Our War Dollars Home campaign, the resolution has 20 cosponsors from cities such as Minneapolis, Baltimore, Santa Fe and Ithaca. All agree that the wars’ combined cost of over one trillion dollars would be better spent in job creation, health care, sustainable energy, infrastructure, and programs to reduce poverty and crime in American cities. “We are spending a billion a month after Osama bin Laden has been killed. And while I appreciate the effort to rebuild nations around the world, we have tremendous needs in communities like mine,” said Joseph C. O'Brien, the Mayor of Worcester, MA and a co-sponsor of the resolution.
The U.S. Conference of Mayors is not known for challenging foreign policy and hasn’t called for an end to a U.S. military engagement since the days of Vietnam. But even the Conference’s mainstream Executive Director Tom Cochran seems fed up with Washington’s priorities. “As the slashing continues by Washington targeted to American cities, $150 billion a year is poured into the Afghanistan War. The money being sent and spent abroad goes unchecked. The small amount provided for infrastructure, security, community development here in the USA is slashed,” Cochran wrote in the April 25 edition of U.S. Mayor.
This basic frustration evades the grasp of the Washington Post Editorial Board, which in a June 11 opinion piece entitled “The Afghan Withdrawal,” dismissed the claim that the United States can no longer afford the $2 billion a week being spent on the war, stating that “the marginal billions that might be gained from withdrawing more troops now will have no significant impact on a deficit problem measured in trillions.” The mayors, the elected officials closest to the people living without food in their bellies, money in their bank accounts, and roofs over their heads, do not underestimate the power of “marginal billions.” A supporter of the Bring Our War Dollars Home Resolution, Mayor Joanne Twomey from Biddeford, Maine, knows how people living in small cities, like her 20,000 constituents, could benefit from bringing home the massive amounts of federal funding that has been sent overseas. "In Biddeford we are cutting $1.6 million in our education budget," complained Mayor Joanne Twomey from Biddeford, Maine, a supporter of the Bring Our War Dollars Home Resolution. "It's my responsibility as mayor to start saying if our priorities were straight, if we could bring these war dollars home, I wouldn't have to be doing this, and neither would the Biddeford school board."
CODEPINK organizer C.J. Minster, who has been working for months on the mayor’s campaign, thinks the mayors’ resolution has a good chance of passing. “We look forward to helping the mayors use their collective power to remind the federal government that true human security includes freedom from hunger, job opportunities, health security, and environmental protection,” said Minster.
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...
10 Comments so far
Show AllBooks not bombs. Food and humanitarian aid instead of misery and suffering for the people who live in under developed countries.
" One of the issues they will vote on is the Bring Our War Dollars Home resolution, introduced by Mayor Kitty Piercy from Eugene, Oregon, which calls on Congress to redirect military spending to domestic priorities."
Wow, finally a sensible discussion of what could be a very workable solution to deficit reduction. I want a "Bring Our War Dollars Home" t shirt. I would wear it proudly.
"This basic frustration evades the grasp of the Washington Post Editorial Board, which in a June 11 opinion piece entitled “The Afghan Withdrawal,” dismissed the claim that the United States can no longer afford the $2 billion a week being spent on the war, stating that “the marginal billions that might be gained from withdrawing more troops now will have no significant impact on a deficit problem measured in trillions.”"
Isn't that the same argument made every time the citizens want to end aid to Israel or reduce our foreign aid in general? Yet cutting aid to NPR is a worthwhile and necessary cut?
"Isn't that the same argument made every time the citizens want to end aid to Israel or reduce our foreign aid in general? Yet cutting aid to NPR is a worthwhile and necessary cut?"
Well, if that means one fewer "news outlet" for AIPAC and Hasbara, sure!
The answer to "Will US Mayors vote to end war" is NO. Many small towns and cities all across the US are dependent on military contracts and sub-contracts. This is true in Vermont and elsewhere. Sometimes the contracts are thinly disguised so that the public will think they are for civilian purposes.
The question should be WILL US VOTERS VOTE TO END WAR. The answer to that question is also NO. Most Americans celebrate war - the bombs bursting in air, rally around the flag, support the troops...
Those who are really anti-war need to face reality, change the strategy, and realize that asking the government to please stop the bombs and drones is not
working.
I agree, Rosemarie.
For rhetorical purposes, local government politicians may occasionally criticize, or at least question, the federal government's funding and spending priorities, and urge that more dollars be spent on butter than guns.
But local government politicians aren't particularly anti-war, or anti-military, for the reasons you mention. And they certainly don't want to alienate or challenge reactionary yahoo constituencies who subscribe to traditional reactionary, chauvinistic jingo patriotism.
So they'll stick to yellow-ribbon, bumper-sticker, pro-military positions, and especially fervently cheer any military-industrial-corporate business that brings jobs to their turf.
No Philadelphia mayor will do or say anything that might cost him or her their seat of honor at the annual Army-Navy game.
Only reactionaries and conservatives are pro-war, pro-military, nationalistic and interventionist. If you support any variations of those beliefs, then you're not a part of the left. If one is legitimately a leftist/liberal/progressive, then you're anti-war, anti-militarist, anti-imperialist, anti-nationalist and non-interventionist. I extend this to opposing Zionism and similar racist ideologies, such as American exceptionalism.
I know that's broad, but that's how I feel. Every time I see someone on Common Dreams supporting a conservative foreign policy position, I question their political affiliation.
Numerous cities passed resolutions calling for troops to be withdrawn from Vietnam during the 60's and early 70's. The invasion and contined occupation of Iraq was condemned by a significant, diverse array of municipalities during the Bush/Cheney era by the Cities for Peace/Voters for Peace organizations.
These symbolic policy pronouncements are valuable even though there's no way they will force an actual reversal of US military intervention policies abroad. In my opinion, the most important function is the framing of public debate, focusing upon the linkage between trillions wasted overseas on endless war while the domestic economy and public service infrastructure goes down the toilet.
It is sadly true that a lot of ordinary Americans - certainly a majority - love both their guns and their butter. War culture and consumer culture in the United States share a twisted, symbiotic relationship. In addition to all of the moral, legal and pragmatic arguments against mindless militarism that Code Pink and other antiwar advocacy groups raise, bringing the war dollars back home should be a central part of the narrative.
Money talks. If forced to choose between butter in the refrigerator and more guns added to the arsenal already in the closet, most Americans will eagerly or reluctantly choose butter. If creature comfort consumerism trumps weapon worship when the chips are down and the issue is called for an up or down public pollicy vote at the end of the day, then I say go for it.
Bill from Saginaw
No*Differance...
Leaders are led by that which gives & keeps them in power... Thus power is their lord & master... Only when peace grants authority, shall mankind fully embrace it's humanity...
To & Fro Insults thrown left right center joins the fight Round they go nothing accomplished nothing said Petty gripes night after night People Die...
12*Minutes + 13*Months = Global Peace Initiative 2*Billion Jobs Global Economic Recovery Mass Poverty Reduction Global Ceasefire Environmental & Abuse Healing Security Unity Tis a Brave New World & so Time to globalize - NOT- Government nor Religion but Humanity.. Unite the C.H.A.O.S. - Spread the L.O.V.E. - 12*Minutes + 13*Months = World4Peace
Media Benjamin, like Kucinich and that ilk, are just pied pipers for the Democrats, supporting war mongers at every election, then berating them between elections so she can appear to actually BE left leaning. She was a huge and important supporter of every war monger candidate, always recommending the "least worst" over the "good'. Worse, she waits until the last minute to betray the real left. Media Benjamin is very much part of the problem and definitely not part of the solution. I wish it wasn't so, but history says it is.