Iraq: Staying the Course?

Can Democrats Make Any Difference?

Donnell Russell
Most Americans didn't know Nancy Pelosi before last month's congressional elections. Those elections gave democrats control of both houses of congress for the first time in 12 years. Now what? Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, will become the first female Speaker of the House in January 2007.

In her first 100 legislative hours at the helm, Pelosi says, she aims to "drain the swamp" by passing a new rules package, including pay-as-you-go budgeting; raise the minimum wage; pass all the independent 9/11 commission recommendations; cut the interest rate on student loans by half; negotiate for lower drug prices in the Medicare prescription-drug program; end subsidies for Big Oil; and allow federal support of embryonic stem-cell research.

I am thrilled at such ambitious however; it is worth mentioning that the single issue that helped the democrats win, Iraq, isn't listed. An accidental omission? Probably not.

The democrats seized on the American voter's frustration with the deteriorating situation in Iraq and the lack of progress and what many perceive as no measurable plan for success. However, democrats didn't actually offer an alternative plan. They couldn't. The reason? No way to implement it.

President Bush alone in his capacity as commander-in-chief of the armed forces is the only one who can call for and implement any change in Iraq or Iraqi policy. He very may well, but is not beholden to the democrats or Pelosi to do so, not constitutionally anyway.

The congress and speaker in waiting Pelosi have only the power of the purse. They could cut funding for the war, but that is a move no congress has done since Vietnam. It would be political suicide for anyone voting for it, particularly anyone with presidential aspirations in 2008.

If the democrats do nothing and the troops languish on in Iraq another year or so with no re-deployment they may experience voter backlash in 2008. Even as team BUSH I led by former Secretary of State James Baker prepares to unveil their recommendations, the call for a pull out (with or without a time table) is waning in both parties. Oddly enough, the Iraq War which was the meal ticket for the democratic take over may end up causing them indigestion.

Published by Donnell Russell

US Army Combat Veteran, an EMT, and security guard. I have had it with political parties, the "PC" generation, the religious right, the secular left, network/cable news, reality TV, and standardized testing....  View profile

  • The congress could cut funding for the war.
  • The president alone sets military policy.
  • Americans want out of Iraq.
Based on congressional appropriations reported at National Priorities Website the Iraq War has cost New Orleans taxpayers over 124,000,000.00 and counting.

1 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Daniel Doyle1/6/2007

    Very fine tunage. The dems won't do anything that they have said. Nothing. They never do. Most of them thru-out my life have been the greatest "sayers" of the biggest aspirations and the smallest "doers" of anything at all. Dreamy-eyed, silly and hard to take serious, and whenever they win the seats we know we are in for a lot of nothing and little or no commitment to anything. When they are there we have to hunker down and wait for them to go away.

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.