# Leading Senate Dems and Pubs join forces on anti-surge resolution **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 1, 2007, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415 "2007-02-01T15:08:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2007, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/1 "2007-02-01T15:08:53Z")
Senators Carl Levin (D-MI) and John Warner (R-VA) have [merged](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/29/AR2007012900164.html) their proposed non-binding resolutions against the “surge” – in hopes of putting together a filibuster-proof majority. Will they succeed? Will it matter? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2007, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/2 "2007-02-01T17:13:50Z")
Maybe. No. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/3 "2007-02-02T00:51:06Z")
1. Yes. Most Dems + some Reps = passage. The compromises have been worked out. And the minimum-wage bill the Reps were opposing as a mini-filibuster tactic is now passed, so the deck is clear for it. 2. Not by itself, being nonbinding. But psychologically it matters enormously. It will be the first time in Bush’s administration that Congress got up on its hind legs and told him to cut the shit. It’ll be a lot easier for them the next time, and the time after that, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/4 "2007-02-02T00:54:18Z")
Wow. After all these years, after everything we’ve been through, Bush was right. He really IS a uniter. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/5 "2007-02-02T01:09:32Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] 2. Not by itself, being nonbinding. But psychologically it matters enormously. It will be the first time in Bush’s administration that Congress got up on its hind legs and told him to cut the shit. It’ll be a lot easier for them the next time, and the time after that, etc. [/QUOTE] It’s not the first time. Congress refused to pass Bush’s social security plan, they refused to pass Bush’s immigration reform plan, they blocked the ports sale to the Dubai company, etc. Bush has actually had a bad relationship with Congress considering that until recently, it was Republican controlled. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/6 "2007-02-02T01:18:13Z")
Bush never actually submitted a Social Security plan or an immigration reform plan; he simply challenged Congress to come up with something that would make him look good. Dubai withdrew from the ports deal; Congress didn’t act on that either. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/7 "2007-02-02T01:25:59Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] Bush never actually submitted a Social Security plan or an immigration reform plan; he simply challenged Congress to come up with something that would make him look good. Dubai withdrew from the ports deal; Congress didn’t act on that either. [/QUOTE] Congress was ready to act on Dubai if they hadn’t withdrawn, though. Frist publically said so. And Bush didn’t submit the Social Security plan or immigration reform plan because he knew Congress wouldn’t pass it and he didn’t want to take the political risk. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/8 "2007-02-02T01:26:21Z")
Does anyone have a link to the wording of the proposed resolution? From what I can read about it, it sounds like a resolution asking the President to “stay the course”. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/9 "2007-02-02T01:32:00Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Does anyone have a link to the wording of the proposed resolution? From what I can read about it, it sounds like a resolution asking the President to “stay the course”. [/QUOTE] The operative language on it is short (I’m leaving out the whereases), so I’ll copy it here…it’s S. Con. Res. 7 > [@](#): > > That it is the sense of Congress that– > > (1) the Senate disagrees with the `plan’ to augment our forces by 21,500, and urges the President instead to consider all options and alternatives for achieving the strategic goals set forth below; > > (2) the Senate believes the United States should continue vigorous operations in Anbar province, specifically for the purpose of combating an insurgency, including elements associated with the Al Qaeda movement, and denying terrorists a safe haven; > > (3) the Senate believes a failed state in Iraq would present a threat to regional and world peace, and the long-term security interests of the United States are best served by an Iraq that can sustain, govern, and defend itself, and serve as an ally in the war against extremists; > > (4) the Congress should not take any action that will endanger United States military forces in the field, including the elimination or reduction of funds for troops in the field, as such an action with respect to funding would undermine their safety or harm their effectiveness in pursuing their assigned missions; > > (5) the primary objective of the overall U.S. strategy in Iraq should be to encourage Iraqi leaders to make political compromises that will foster reconciliation and strengthen the unity government, ultimately leading to improvements in the security situation; > > (6) the military part of this strategy should focus on maintaining the territorial integrity of Iraq, denying international terrorists a safe haven, conducting counterterrorism operations, promoting regional stability, supporting Iraqi efforts to bring greater security to Baghdad, and training and equipping Iraqi forces to take full responsibility for their own security; > > (7) United States military operations should, as much as possible, be confined to these goals, and should charge the Iraqi military with the primary mission of combating sectarian violence; > > (8) the military Rules of Engagement for this plan should reflect this delineation of responsibilities, and the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff should clarify the command and control arrangements in Baghdad; > > (9) the United States Government should transfer to the Iraqi military, in an expeditious manner, such equipment as is necessary; > > (10) the United States Government should engage selected nations in the Middle East to develop a regional, internationally sponsored peace-and-reconciliation process for Iraq; > > (11) the Administration should provide regular updates to the Congress, produced by the Commander of United States Central Command and his subordinate commanders, about the progress or lack of progress the Iraqis are making toward this end; and > > (12) our overall military, diplomatic, and economic strategy should not be regarded as an `open-ended’ or unconditional commitment, but rather as a new strategy that hereafter should be conditioned upon the Iraqi government’s meeting benchmarks that must be delineated in writing and agreed to by the Iraqi Prime Minister. Such benchmarks should include, but not be limited to, the deployment of that number of additional Iraqi security forces as specified in the plan in Baghdad, ensuring equitable distribution of the resources of the Government of Iraq without regard to the sect or ethnicity of recipients, enacting and implementing legislation to ensure that the oil resources of Iraq benefit Sunni Arabs, Shia Arabs, Kurds, and other Iraqi citizens in an equitable manner, and the authority of Iraqi commanders to make tactical and operational decisions without political intervention. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/10 "2007-02-02T02:05:23Z")
[QUOTE=Captain Amazing] The operative language on it is short (I’m leaving out the whereases), so I’ll copy it here…it’s S. Con. Res. 7 [/QUOTE] Thanks. Wow, that is the most mealy mouthed thing I’ve read in a long time. They couldn’t even bring themselves to name Iran or Syria, just “selected nations”. Looks like “stay the course” to me. I’m with Feingold on this-- he says he won’t sign any non-binding resolutions. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/11 "2007-02-02T02:24:53Z")
Well, heck, what do you expect? This thing is strictly for the ‘Go to hell, you loser, we’re in charge now’ factor. I do find it surprising that the ‘surge’ as it seems, just isn’t getting the traction I would have expected. The President can go through with it, of course, but it sure looks like a whole bunch of people, even in his own party, are willing to tell him he’s on his own politically with this thing. What the President does in response to this will be telling. There’s been quite the charm offensive under way this last week from administration types to make sure people know they’re going forward and that they continue to believe it’s a good idea. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/12 "2007-02-02T03:46:34Z")
[QUOTE=Jonathan Chance] Well, heck, what do you expect? This thing is strictly for the ‘Go to hell, you loser, we’re in charge now’ factor. [/quote] I disagree. This is exactly why Congress doesn’t run our wars-- it’s a meaningless, watered down, pile of… nothing. And that’s the 100 more sensible folks in Congress. If it were a statement of who is in charge, it would at least have some baby teeth in it. > [@](#): > > What the President does in response to this will be telling. There’s been quite the charm offensive under way this last week from administration types to make sure people know they’re going forward and that they continue to believe it’s a good idea. I think that Bush is going to be given 4-6 more months to operate as he wishes. After that point, if things aren’t showing signs of improvement, we may very well see a real measure passed-- one that either rescinds or redefines the AUMF or cuts off funding for some time in the future. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/13 "2007-02-02T04:10:56Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Wow, that is the most mealy mouthed thing I’ve read in a long time. [/QUOTE] It sure is. Paragraph 4 has got to go. Let the president sweat, let him veto it, and let the republicans who sustain the veto take a little _heat_ for God sakes! It’s not as if things’ll get better come June. Why the hell would the dems vote for a resolution that leaves _them_ open to charges of flip flopping when it becomes clear a few months down the line that congress _must_ act to defund? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/14 "2007-02-02T04:31:02Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Wow, that is the most mealy mouthed thing I’ve read in a long time. [/quote] That’s because it’s a compromise. Levin had to agree to drop the language about a surge not being in America’s national interest, and Warner had to agree to drop the language about maybe supporting a troop-level increase at some time in the future, IIRC. [QUOTE=John Mace] I’m with Feingold on this-- he says he won’t sign any non-binding resolutions. [/QUOTE] 😕 He doesn’t have to **sign** anything, he just has to vote. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/15 "2007-02-02T04:32:45Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] And that’s the 100 more sensible folks in Congress. [/quote] :dubious: And just what makes you think the House is any less sensible than the entirely superfluous ought-to-be-abolished Senate? [QUOTE=John Mace] I think that Bush is going to be given 4-6 more months to operate as he wishes. After that point, if things aren’t showing signs of improvement, we may very well see a real measure passed-- one that either rescinds or redefines the AUMF or cuts off funding for some time in the future. [/QUOTE] Of course, by that time, we might already be at war with Iran . . . ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/16 "2007-02-02T04:39:28Z")
You know, for all the protest within the Congress about the war, they are too chickenshit to do the only thing that matters: de-funding the war. Is this about politics, or is this about doing the right thing? If the right thing to do is getting out of Iraq right now, someone has to take the hit, and they’re all afraid to do it. I used to think that John Kerry was a disloyal ass, but due to the passage of time I have learned what it was that he learned, summed up in one sentence: How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake? The Democrats, by not stepping up to the plate and doing the right thing, the thing that the Republicans were unwilling to do, are asking that very question of the soldiers in Iraq. But hey, the military goes Republican, so it’s not like they’re losing any votes over this, right? :rolleyes: Trapped by cowardice: the epitaph of both parties in the 110th Congress. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/17 "2007-02-02T04:43:34Z")
[QUOTE=Airman Doors, USAF] You know, for all the protest within the Congress about the war, they are too chickenshit to do the only thing that matters: de-funding the war. [/QUOTE] :dubious: And you would rather they **did?** ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/18 "2007-02-02T04:46:12Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] :dubious: And you would rather they **did?** [/QUOTE] If that’s what it takes, yes. At this point there nothing left to be done but withdrawal in disgrace. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/19 "2007-02-02T05:20:07Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] That’s because it’s a compromise. Levin had to agree to drop the language about a surge not being in America’s national interest, and Warner had to agree to drop the language about maybe supporting a troop-level increase at some time in the future, IIRC. [/quote] Yes, I know it’s a compromise. That still doesn’t change the fact that it is virtually contentless. > [@](#): > > 😕 He doesn’t have to **sign** anything, he just has to vote. My bad. I probably meant to say “sign on to”, but “vote for” is more to the point. > [@](#): > > And just what makes you think the House is any less sensible than the entirely superfluous ought-to-be-abolished Senate? Because the House has a bunch of nuts in it. Sure, there are some good pols, but the ration of good:nuts is much lower in the House. If I were to abolish one chamber, I’d get rid of the House and keep the Senate. > [@](#): > > Of course, by that time, we might already be at war with Iran . . . :rolleyes: I’m still willing to bet on that if you are. But then, I know you won’t. For some reason, folks like you feel the need to exaggerate the dangers Bush presents as president. It’s pretty humorous to watch, actually. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415/20 "2007-02-02T05:43:43Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Because the House has a bunch of nuts in it. [/quote] So has the Senate. [QUOTE=John Mace] Sure, there are some good pols, but the ration of good:nuts is much lower in the House. [/QUOTE] Cite? Analysis? Names? Anything? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leading-senate-dems-and-pubs-join-forces-on-anti-surge-resolution/390415.md?page=2)