Ohio Daily Blog

Just Can't Get Enough

Friday, January 19, 2007

Where Do Ohio Members of Congress Stand on Iraq Escalation?

Think Progress has a great scorecard on where Senators and Representatives stand on Bush's plan to plunge more U.S. troops into the fray in Baghdad and Anbar Province. Where do Ohio's federal lawmakers stand? All the Democrats are opposed except Wilson, whose views are not known. Among the Republicans, three are in support, two oppose or lean oppose, and six are keeping mum so far:

Sen. George Voinovich (R) - OPPOSE: “At this point I am skeptical that a surge in troops alone will bring an end to sectarian violence and the insurgency that is fomenting instability in Iraq,” Voinovich said. “The generals who have served there do not believe additional troops alone will help. And my faith in Prime Minister [Nouri] al-Maliki’s political will to make the hard choices necessary to bring about a political solution is fragile at best.” [Link]

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D) - OPPOSE: “‘I’m against an escalation in this war, and sending more troops is an escalation,’ [Sherrod Brown] said.” [Link]


Rep. Steve Chabot (R-1st) - REFUSED TO ANSWER: “‘There are serious consequences to our security if we fail in Iraq. It is important for Congress and the President to work together to address the challenges we face in Iraq and the War on Terror. Clearly, our troops are doing a tremendous job and deserve our full support. However, we must also hold the Iraqi government accountable and insist that they step up and take the lead in securing their nation.’” [Link]

Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-2nd) - UNKNOWN

Rep. Mike Turner (R-3rd) - UNKNOWN

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-4th) - UNKNOWN

Rep. Paul Gillmor (R-5th) - SUPPORT: “In his speech, President Bush committed more than 20,000 additional U.S. troops to stabilize Iraq. Personally, I do not know whether committing additional U.S. troops will aid Iraqi Security Forces in quickly assuming control. However, as Commander-in-Chief, it is the President’s sole responsibility to direct our military operations.” [Link]

Rep. Charlie Wilson (D-6th) - UNKNOWN

Rep. Dave Hobson (R-7th) - LEAN OPPOSE: “Springfield Republican David Hobson questions whether this is the right time to be deploying more troops.” [Link]

Rep. John Boehner (R-8th) - SUPPORT: “Leaving Iraq to the terrorists would be a direct threat to the safety and security of the American people. I commend the President for recognizing that recent strategies have often failed to meet our expectations.” [Link]

Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-9th) - OPPOSE: “I do not support an escalation of US troop levels in Iraq. President Bush cannot lead America to military victory in Iraq absent a viable political solution that puts Iraq back together and redeploys our soldiers from that of an occupying force.” [Link]

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-10th) - OPPOSE: “The American people voted for new direction. That direction is out of Iraq. Let us rescue our troops. Let us rescue a domestic agenda. Let us reverse policies that created chaos, massive civilian causalities and destruction in Iraq”. [Link]

Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-11th) - OPPOSE: “Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Democrat of Cleveland, proposed that Bush escalate ‘the truth level’ rather than the troop levels. ‘He should be escalating how much truth he’s giving to the American people’ about lives lost, about war injuries, and about contractors who have been enriched, she said.” [Link]

Rep. Betty Sutton (D-12th) - OPPOSE: “Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Copley, is opposed to sending more troops. Her spokesman Linden Zakula said Sutton believes Americans ’spoke loud and clear on election day that they’re against the escalation.’” [Link]

Rep. Pat Tiberi (R-13th) - UNKNOWN

Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-14th) - OPPOSE: “‘Like many Americans, I desperately want America to succeed in Iraq and I would welcome a fresh approach,’ LaTourette said. ‘This isn’t a fresh approach. This is more of the same.’” [Link]

Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-15th) - UNKOWN: “Rep. Deborah Pryce, R-Upper Arlington, who narrowly won re-election, said Bush ‘must convince me and the American public that security in Iraq is attainable, and that his proposal marks the beginning of the end of our presence in Iraq and not an acceleration of the status quo.’” [Link]

Rep. Ralph Regula (R-16th) - SUPPORT: “‘Essentially he (Bush) is saying that the Iraqis have to take responsibility for their country and their government,’ Regula, R-Bethlehem Township, said after the speech. ‘We will be there to help them. And that’s the reason we need some additional manpower.’” [Link]

Rep. Tim Ryan (D-17th) - OPPOSE: Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Niles, called on Bush to ‘end our occupation of Iraq, not escalate it.’
‘Sending more of our service men and women to police Iraq’s bloody civil war will do little to overcome the many problems President Bush’s failed policy has created,’ he said in a statement. [Link]

Rep. Zack Space (D-18th) - OPPOSE: “‘The president … did not provide real answers to the real questions Americans are asking about how a troop surge will bring about success in Iraq,’ Space said. ‘Without a clear plan and a clear objective, I fear that a troop increase will only deepen the disaster that our Iraq policy has become.’” [Link]

Labels: ,


At January 20, 2007 1:36 PM , David said...

I think it's safe to say Wilson's against it. Check out this article:


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home