Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

House passes war resolution, despite Democratic charges of partisanship
AP | 3/21/03 | KEN GUGGENHEIM

Posted on 03/21/2003 3:27:51 AM PST by kattracks

WASHINGTON, Mar 21, 2003 (AP WorldStream via COMTEX) -- A House resolution intended to show Congress' unified support for U.S. troops in Iraq passed overwhelmingly early Friday, but angered some Democrats who said they felt pressured into backing President George W. Bush's decision to go to war.

The Democrats said the Republican House leadership was forcing them to offer "unequivocal support" of Bush "for his firm leadership and decisive action in the conduct of military operations in Iraq" - or reject a resolution showing support for soldiers and their families at a time of war.

"I trust the American people to see through this attempt to coerce endorsement of his preventive war doctrine," said Rep. John Conyers, a Democrat.

The 392-11 House vote, with 22 members voting present, came after a sometimes angry and emotional debate. It contrasted with the few reservations expressed in a 99-0 Senate vote Thursday for a similar resolution with less effusive praise for the president. One senator was absent because of an illness in his family.

In the House, Rep. Randy Cunningham, a Republican, urged lawmakers not to let political differences damage a resolution supporting the troops. He recalled how his mother passed out when she learned he had been shot down as a Navy fighter pilot in Vietnam.

"In my district and in your district, I bet you, there are children right now weeping for their parents," he said, his voice cracking. "I know that different people believe certain ways. But let's not do it here, ladies and gentlemen."

Opponents of the resolution said they want to show support for American troops, but did not want to support a war they didn't believe in.

"In all good conscience, I cannot and will not vote for a resolution that supports and endorses a failed policy that led us to war," said Rep. John Lewis.

Despite the differences, both the Senate and House resolutions passed with support from some lawmakers who had voted against a resolution in October authorizing the war.

"When we go into battle, despite our differences on policy, when we go into battle, it will be one team, one fight," said House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, who opposed that war resolution.

After Bush abandoned efforts Monday to seek a U.N. resolution for the war, Democrats combined statements of support for the troops with criticism of the administration's diplomatic efforts. Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle drew Republican fire for saying Bush "failed so miserably at diplomacy that we're now forced to war."

With airstrikes in Baghdad beginning Wednesday night, Daschle and most other critics moderated their tone. "We may have had differences of opinion about what brought us to this point, but the president is the commander in chief and today we unite behind him," Daschle said.

The October resolution authorizing war passed the House 296-133 and the Senate 77-23. Many Democrats with reservations about the war were reluctant to oppose a popular president on a national security issue one year after the Sept. 11 attacks - and just weeks before tight midterm congressional elections.

Democrats have taken on Bush for failing to win broad international support for the war, for not providing estimates of the war's costs and for making Iraq a higher priority than other potential threats such as North Korea. But with the resolution authorizing force behind them, lawmakers had little leverage over war plans.

Republicans have remained solidly behind Bush.

By KEN GUGGENHEIM Associated Press Writer



TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: warresolution
THOSE DUPLICITOUS DEMS
1 posted on 03/21/2003 3:27:52 AM PST by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kattracks
392-11 House vote, with 22 members voting present

Interesting. The Senate voted 99-0 (Zell Miller was not present to do committment in GA). Looks like the Senate Demos were doing some CYA from Daschle's words.

Nice to know 33 House members can't seem to bring themselves to support American troops in the battlefield defending the right for those Reps to spew their venom.
2 posted on 03/21/2003 3:34:58 AM PST by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
We'll need the names of the traitors in the House who cannot support the troops and/or their CIC.
3 posted on 03/21/2003 3:42:34 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
2004 election will be S&A against the democrats.
4 posted on 03/21/2003 3:43:05 AM PST by Semper Paratus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Nancy Pelosi and her party can't back our country's just cause, eh? 76% of Americans disagree with them. They're left with their ultra leftist hate America hard core base.
5 posted on 03/21/2003 3:45:53 AM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
speaking of little "tommydove"...Who said this: ..."The president has made the correct decision to undertake military action at this time, any delay would have give Saddam Hussein time to reconstitute his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and undermine support for our efforts"....it was little TOMMYHAWK!... six years ago on the eve of impeachment....

6 posted on 03/21/2003 3:53:13 AM PST by M-cubed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Does anyone know the names of the dissenters or a link to this information... I have some letters to write!
7 posted on 03/21/2003 6:13:07 AM PST by SoggyBottomBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun
We'll need the names of the traitors in the House who cannot support the troops and/or their CIC.

The usual trash and Ron Paul.

8 posted on 03/21/2003 6:14:29 AM PST by steveegg (The French have removed 1 leg from the UN; it is now LN (League of Nations).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All
FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 83
(Republicans in roman; Democrats in italic; Independents underlined)

      H CON RES 104     YEA-AND-NAY     21-MAR-2003   3:02 AM
      QUESTION: On Agreeing to the Resolution
      BILL TITLE:  Expressing the Support and Appreciation of the Nation for the President and the Members of the Armed Forces Who are Participating in Operation Iraqi Freedom

YEAS NAYS PRES NV
REPUBLICAN 224   1 4
DEMOCRATIC 167 11 21 6
INDEPENDENT 1      
TOTALS 392 11 22 10

--- YEAS    392 ---

Long list of Yeas snipped to save space. If they arent listed below in the Nays, Presents, or Not Voting, then they voted Yea.

--- NAYS    11 ---

Conyers McDermott Towns
Honda Rangel Waters
Jones (OH) Scott (VA) Watson
Lee Stark
--- PRESENTS    22 ---

Brown (OH) Jackson (IL) Paul
Brown, Corrine Jackson-Lee (TX) Payne
Carson (IN) Johnson, E. B. Rush
Clay Kilpatrick Sabo
Cummings Kucinich Schakowsky
Davis (IL) Lewis (GA) Watt
Doggett Meeks (NY)
Farr Owens
--- NOT VOTING    10 ---

Buyer McCarthy (MO) Thornberry
Gordon Rogers (MI) Udall (CO)
Lantos Saxton
Lipinski Snyder

9 posted on 03/21/2003 6:14:44 AM PST by Tatze (Give Pizza Chants!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson