Kerry: Bush Will Relent on Iraq by September

In the wake of Harry Reid's announcement that he planned to force an around the clock debate on Iraq, Casey Ross posted on The Boston Herald Politics Blog on Monday night that "U.S. Sen. John F. Kerry on Monday predicted that U.S. troops will be pulled from Iraq by the early fall, saying President Bush is slowly wilting under pressure from Congress."

“I believe that by September the president will announce that troops will be able to come back, and they’ll do it under one guise or another,” Kerry said during a rare visit to the State House on Monday.

The senator was on Beacon Hill to tout government investments in renewable energy and small business, but he took time to address the intensifying battle over Iraq war policy.

He said senate Democrats do not have the 60 votes needed to force a withdrawal, but he believes Bush cannot hold out against opposition much longer. “My hope is the president is going to change his policy because he’s going to see that this thing’s moving against him.”

Kerry, of course has been a leader in the Senate fight to bring the troops home for the past couple of years. Last Thursday Kerry delivered a powerful speech on the Senate floor in the Iraq War, telling fellow members of the Senate, " If you know this policy is broken now, don’t wait until September – fix it now."

Meanwhile, the Bush Administration is still forcing the issue and General Pace said on Monday that "troop buildup" was possible. Sounds like more smoke and mirrors from the Bush administration for their failing mission in Iraq. As Dan Froomkin pointed out, Bush "has a tendency to celebrate his generals when they're providing him political cover -- then stick a knife in their backs when they're no longer of any use to him."

I won't be at all surprised if Kerry is right on this one, as he has been so many times in the past.

Cross posted from The Democratic Daily.

Kerry to Vote No on Iraq Bill: ‘An Iraq Bill Without a Deadline is Meaningless’

The new Iraq spending bill is making waves and Chris Bowers on MYDD has the new video from Chris Dodd up that explains why Dodd is voting "NO" on the bill. Bowers said, "It will be interesting to see if there is a chorus of Democrats who start to join him on this." Meteor Blades on DKos reports that "nearly a two-thirds majority, will vote against the egregious Iraq funding "compromise" put together by the Senate-House conference committee."

Here's one Senator who will be joining Dodd with a "NO" vote. Personally, I had no reason to think that Kerry would support the new plan...

Sen. John Kerry issued the following statement today on his plan to vote “no” on a military spending bill that no longer contains any binding deadline for the redeployment of troops from Iraq. He reiterated that a "timeframe for redeployment of the troops is the Only Way Forward."

"We support the troops by getting the policy right and this bill allows the President to keep getting the policy wrong. We need a deadline to force Iraqis to stand up for Iraq and bring our heroes home, not watered down benchmarks and blank check waivers for this President. We support the troops by funding the right mission, not with a White House that opposes a pay raise for our brave men and women in uniform,” Kerry said. “The original Senate legislation offered a roadmap to change course in Iraq. This new version enables the Administration and Iraqi politicians to deliver more of the same. I am determined to continue pressing this issue until President Bush changes course. We owe our troops nothing less than a strategy that is worthy of their sacrifice.”

Keep the pressure on... Chime in here: Tell Congress - No Blank Check For Iraq.

Kerry Amendment Protects Children, Families Caught In Immigration Raids

With the immigration reform debate heating up in Congress once again, a new Rasmussen Reports Poll shows that "just 26% of American voters favor passage of the legislation." Senator John Kerry introduced an amendment today to that would offer protections for immigrant families and children who are caught in Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) workplace raids – like last month’s jarring roundup in New Bedford, Mass.

Kerry said that his amendment was aimed at putting a little “humanity” into ICE. His amendment will be offered to the broader, bi-partisan immigration bill, which Kerry praised as a welcome start toward repairing a broken system.

“We need safe borders and we need a sensible immigration policy,” Senator Kerry said. “But there is no place in our country for families being torn apart by reckless ICE workplace raids that separate parents from children and coerce immigrants into waiving their rights. The raid in New Bedford was inhumane. It left young children confused and alone. We need a law that is enforceable and sensible but that also deals humanely with the millions of hard-working immigrant families that contribute to our country each day.”

Kerry’s amendment would:

o Require ICE to afford access to state social service agencies to screen and interview detainees. A majority of the problems in these raids arose from the fact that the people were too scared or intimidated to provide information to ICE agents. Social service agencies are also better equipped to handle child and family needs.

o ICE must also give sufficient notice to these state agencies so they can arrange for representatives who speak the detainees’ first language fluently and for any other services that may be needed.

o To the extent that space is available aliens that are being detained should be to be placed in detention within the jurisdiction of the local ICE field office. Previously detainees, many of them mothers, have been shipped off to facilities hundreds of miles away from their families to await a determination of their status.

o If it is determined that an alien has humanitarian grounds for release including but not limited to those with medical conditions that require special attention, pregnant women, nursing mothers, parents who are the sole caretakers of their minor children or elderly relatives, parents who function as the primary contact between the family and those outside the home due to language barriers, parents who are needed to support their spouses in caring for sick or special needs children, parents whose spouses are ill or otherwise unable to be sole caretaker, and minors, within 72 hours of their apprehension, if they are not subject to mandatory detention or pose an immediate flight risk, they shall be released on their own recognizance, on minimum bond or placed in the Intensive Supervision Appearance Program (ISAP). This gives ICE the ability to track the alien but also allows families to be reunited and aliens to receive medical and social services.

o ICE must also provide a toll free number for families to use after a raid, to report their relationship to a detainee or for more information about the status of their loved one.

o In cases of raids with the apprehension of 50 or more aliens ICE must also allow the aliens access to legal orientation presentations provided by independent, non-governmental agencies through the Legal Orientation program. This program cuts down on confusion and allows the detainees to fully appreciate their rights.

RELATED POSTS:

Where Has Our Sense of Decency Gone?

Is ICE Out of Control Under BushCo? Kerry Vows Investigation into Raid

John Kerry Asks Bush Not To Cut Military Pay Raise

On Saturday, I reported here that the "Bush Administration won’t approve a pay raise for our military." The simple reasoning is of course, Republicans don't really support the troops.

The piece I quoted Saturday from the Boston Globe noted that Kerry had sent a letter to Bush on Friday, saying that "he was “extremely disappointed” by the White House position on the pay raise, saying it stands “in direct contrast to the will of the American people who support all the efforts to support our troops.”"

Today, Senator Kerry asked Bush to back off his plan to cut a proposed military pay raise. Kerry also asked Bush not to cut a proposed benefit for surviving spouses, which Congress and veterans groups say would help grieving families with a $40 month benefit to help cover expenses when a loved one is killed in action. Last week, the White House opposed both of those provisions in the FY 2008 National Defense Authorization Bill.

“It’s unacceptable that this White House continues to choose more tax breaks for the richest Americans and less pay and fewer benefits for our military families,” Senator Kerry said. “Our Democratic Congress has put forth a plan to give our troops a raise at a time of war, and no White House opposition will stand in the way of our commitment to our military. Our troops make incredible sacrifices for our country and we owe them a pay raise and benefits that make it clear we honor their sacrifice. We will fight for this pay raise for our troops until it becomes a reality.”

The Office of Management and Budget said that the House bill’s moves to increase military pay by .5 percent (from 3.0 to 3.5 percent) and give a $40 monthly benefit for surviving spouses and military families were unnecessary. On the same day, the White House expressed opposition to the FY 2008 Budget Resolution Conference Report because it failed to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.

Last year’s pay increase for members of the uniformed services was just 2.2 percent, the lowest since 1993. Congress has made a commitment to keep pay raises for the military ahead of private sector pay raises.

Kerry is the author of the Military Family Bill of Rights, which has become law. Kerry’s Bill increased the death benefit for surviving spouses and families of troops who die in action to $250,000 and extended the amount of time they can remain in military housing to one full year, along with increasing TRICARE benefits and promoting better care for those suffering from PTSD and other mental illness.

Below is text of the letter Kerry sent Friday:

May 18, 2007

The President
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20007

Dear Mr. President:

We are all proud of our men and women in the American military who continue to perform magnificently in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world. They represent the best that this country has to offer, and America owes them and their families a special debt of honor and gratitude. In light of their sacrifice, I ask you to change your position and support a 3.5 percent increase in military pay and an increase in the Special Survivor Indemnity Allowance to help American military families.

On May 16, the Office of Management and Budget’s Statement of Administration Policy for the House FY 2008 National Defense Authorization bill opposes Section 644 of the bill, which would pay a monthly Special survivor indemnity allowance of $40 from the Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund, calling the existing benefits “sufficient”. The Statement of Administration Policy also “strongly opposes” Sections 601 and 606 of the House bill, which provide a 0.5 percent increase in military pay above the President’s proposed 3.0 percent across-the-board pay increase, calling it “unnecessary”.

I am extremely disappointed in these decisions. This position fails to honor our military families who have made the ultimate sacrifice. It also stands in direct contrast to the will of the American people who support all efforts to support our troops.

Most disappointing, on the same day your position on a military pay increase was announced, the Office of Management and Budget Director Rob Portman expressed opposition to the FY 2008 Budget Resolution Conference Report because it failed to extend tax cuts to provide billions for the wealthiest in our country.

Those who have stood for us should know that we stand with them, today and always. These provisions can do something to ease their burden--but truly supporting our troops requires that we act not just as individuals, but as a nation.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,

John F. Kerry

Tomorrow, Senator John Kerry and House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel will hold a press conference to respond to President Bush’s opposition to a 3.5 percent military pay increase for American troops. The press conference will be held in the Senate T.V. and Radio Press Gallery at 11:30 am est.

Kerry Plan Would Save Bristol Bay from Oil Drilling

John Kerry introduced the Bristol Bay Protection Act on Monday, which will permanently prohibit oil and gas drilling in Alaska’s Bristol Bay. Bristol Bay is north of the Alaskan peninsula.

The North Aleutian Basin Planning Area in Bristol Bay has been banned from drilling under the Congressional Moratorium, but last week, the Bush Administration announced plans to lift the ban and begin drilling there starting in July. Kerry’s bill would ban all drilling in Bristol Bay.

“We can’t depend on drilling just because some refuse to take on our energy challenge in a meaningful way,” Senator Kerry said. “Bristol Bay contains some of our nation’s best remaining fish and wildlife habitat. This legislation will permanently prohibit drilling in Bristol Bay and uphold an important mandate that protects our coastlines from drilling.”

Kerry’s legislation is the Senate companion to H.R. 1957, introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Inslee (D-Wash.), Rep Gilchrest (R – Md.), and Rep. Hinchey (D – N.Y.) Kerry’s legislation would take effect immediately after passage.

“As gas prices soar and the threat of global warming looms, we need bold new ideas to become energy independent,” Kerry added. “This administration looks at every unspoiled landscape in America and wonders how much oil is buried beneath it. We can’t sell off Alaska’s coastline to the big oil companies. I will work with my colleagues in the House and here in the Senate and fight this dangerous proposal.”

Ed Schultz mentioned this on his show today, noting that Kerry is a guy who is "way ahead of the curve" when it comes to the issue of becoming energy independent. With gas prices soaring under the Bush Administration it's time to make a change and break from from Bush's dangerous addiction to oil.

The oil industry is none too happy about Kerry's plan.

Cross posted on The Democratic Daily.

John Kerry on 2007 Trustee Report on Social Security and Medicare

Today, the Social Security Administration released their annual Report on Social Security and Medicare.

John Kerry, Chair of the Finance Subcommittee on Social Security, Pension and Family Policy, released the following statement on the 2007 Trustee’s Report on Social Security and Medicare:

The Trustee’s projections show that the Social Security Fund will be exhausted in 2041 and the Medicare Trust Fund in 2019 – each one year later than the projections in last year’s reports. Both reports prove the continued need for bipartisan moves in Congress to strengthen these vitally important programs in the long-term. The report also shows that Social Security remains sound for decades and proves there is no need to privatize Social Security.

“The Trustee’s report is a crystal clear message that any moves to privatize social security wouldn’t just hurt this program for our seniors, but are also completely unnecessary,” Senator Kerry said. “The report shows that Medicare’s long-term viability is an urgent priority, but doesn’t justify the arbitrary cuts to the program designed by the previous Republican Congress. We must not make reckless cuts to the program, but instead combat skyrocketing costs throughout our health care system and make responsible investments in Medicare. I look forward to working with my colleagues to achieve broader prevention and disease management services that increase quality for patients and decrease costs over time.

“We will work in our new Democratic Congress in a bipartisan manner to strengthen Social Security and Medicare, invest in their long term strength, and fight any moves to privatize and endanger these compacts with seniors who have worked a lifetime,” Kerry added. “Social Security and Medicare have for decades kept faith with our bedrock American values by protecting our seniors from falling into poverty and keeping retired Americans and their families healthy and secure.”

The full report from the SSA is available here.

Climate Change Called a Security Threat, Kerry Calls for Congress to Act

A panel of retired generals and admirals warned yesterday that "Global warming poses a "serious threat to America's national security" and the military should act now to minimize the destabilizing consequences of rising temperatures."

Shortages of food and water could cause weak governments to collapse, increasingly severe natural disasters could draw U.S. forces into humanitarian missions in volatile areas, and melting Arctic ice could spark territorial disputes over shipping routes and natural resources.

Even the effectiveness of sonar used by American submarines could be at risk if parts of the oceans become less salty.

The 63-page report describes climate change as a "threat multiplier" that makes dangerous situations around the world all the more menacing.

"We will pay for this one way or another," said retired Marine Gen. Anthony C. Zinni, who commanded U.S. forces in the Middle East. "We will pay to reduce greenhouse gas emissions today … or we'll pay the price later in military terms. And that will involve human lives."

Senator John Kerry wrote to the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Joseph Biden (D-Del.) today, requesting that the Committee hold a hearing on the implications that the growing threat of global climate change has on our national security. Kerry's letter comes in the wake of the report noted above that called “National Security and the Threat of Climate Change” that found that global warming presents a serious national security threat. Below is text of Kerry’s letter:

April 17, 2007

The Honorable Joseph Biden
Chairman
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
201 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Chairman Biden:

I know that you and I share a commitment to addressing global climate change, and I appreciate every opportunity to work together to combat this pressing issue.

As you know, a blue-ribbon panel of retired three- and four-star admirals and generals released a report earlier this week entitled “National Security and the Threat of Climate Change.” The report found that global warming presents a serious national security threat that could affect Americans at home, impact U.S. military operations and heighten global tensions.

Specifically, the report warns that the effects of global warming could lead to large-scale migrations, increased border tensions, the spread of disease and conflicts over food and water – all of which could eventually lead to direct US military involvement. The report recommends that climate change be integrated into the nation’s security strategies and says the United States “should commit to a stronger national and international role to help stabilize climate changes at levels that will avoid significant disruption to global security and stability.”

Given these clear implications for United States foreign policy, I respectfully request that the Foreign Relations Committee hold a hearing on this issue, with the specific goal of exploring the implications of climate change – including rising ocean levels, droughts and violent weather – on our national security.

I look forward to working with you on this issue.

Sincerely,

John F. Kerry

Science Daily notes that the "full report will be available on SecurityAndClimate.cna.org." Jonathan Powers weighs in on the issue on the HuffPo. And, Environmental News Service has more here.

Henry Kissinger: Military Victory Not Possible in Iraq

Henry Kissinger, "who helped engineer the U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam" broke with the Bush Administration on Sunday and said, "the problems in Iraq are more complex than that conflict, and military victory is no longer possible."

In an AP News exclusive, Kissinger noted that "A 'military victory' in the sense of total control over the whole territory, imposed on the entire population, is not possible."

The faceless, ubiquitous nature of Iraq's insurgency, as well as the religious divide between Shiite and Sunni rivals, makes negotiating peace more complex, he said.

"It is a more complicated problem," Kissinger said. "The Vietnam War involved states, and you could negotiate with leaders who controlled a defined area."

But Kissinger, an architect of the Vietnam War who has also advised Bush on Iraq, warned that a sudden pullout of U.S. troops or loss of influence could unleash chaos.

"I am basically sympathetic to President Bush," he said. "I am partly sympathetic to it because I have seen comparable situations."

During his tenure under President Richard Nixon, first as national security adviser and then as secretary of state, Kissinger faced a similar challenge in formulating policy for a Vietnam War that was increasingly unpopular at home.

He oversaw a gradual U.S. pullout from Vietnam through a strategy also planned for Iraq, where U.S. troops are training their Iraqi counterparts to take fuller control of security. He also negotiated directly with North Vietnamese leaders on ending the conflict.

Kissinger said in the interview, echoing what John Kerry has been saying for a very long time that, "the best way forward is to reconcile the differences between Iraq's warring sects with help from other countries." He also "applauded efforts to host an international conference bringing together the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Iraq's neighbors, "including bringing Iran to the table, as Kerry has suggested.

"That is the sort of framework out of which it is conceivable that an agreement should emerge," Kissinger said. "One needs to be prepared to negotiate with adversaries."

Saying that the "fighting in Iraq is likely to continue for years," Kissinger also said, "that America's national interest requires an end to partisan bickering at home over war policy."

"The role of America in the world cannot be defined by our internal partisan quarrels," he said. "All the leaders, both Republican and Democratic, have to remember that it will go on for several more years and find some basis for common action."

It's doubtful that the Bush Administration will heed Kissinger's comments, but they would be wise to do so. It's painfully obvious that they are on the wrong course and with more and more prominent Republican coming forward and breaking with the Bush Adminstration on Iraq, we can only hope that the Bush Administration will begin to listen.

Kerry: Senate Democrats United Behind Iraq Deadline Plan

John Kerry praised the move by Senate Democrats toward setting a deadline for redeploying combat troops today. In a press conference today, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid joined "Assistant Democratic Leader Dick Durbin, Democratic Conference Vice Chairman Charles Schumer, Democratic Conference Secretary Patty Murray, Senator Russ Feingold, and Senator Evan Bayh to announce a new Joint Resolution to revise U.S. policy on Iraq. Iraq has fallen into a bloody civil war, and as conditions on the ground have changed so must U.S. policy change to meet them."

The Reid Joint Resolution builds on the longstanding Democratic position on Iraq and the Levin-Reed Amendment: the current conflict in Iraq requires a political solution, Iraq must take responsibility for its own future, and our troops should not be policing a civil war. It contains binding language to direct the President to transition the mission for U.S. forces in Iraq and begin their phased redeployment within one-hundred twenty days with a goal of redeploying all combat forces by March 31, 2008. A limited number of troops would remain for the purposes of force protection, training and equipping Iraqi troops, and targeted counter-terror options.

Kerry's statement in response to the announcement from Democratic leaders that they are offering legislation that sets a deadline for the deployment of US troops from Iraq, is as follows:

“This plan is a critical step forward for our country, and the brave men and women of our armed forces who have been waiting for Washington to provide a clear plan forward in Iraq. Last June, 12 senators joined me in voting to set a deadline for redeployment of American combat troops from Iraq.

Now we can all stand united behind an exit strategy that includes the deadline we need to get the Iraqis to stand up for Iraq and bring American combat troops home. I’m pleased that today’s solution is built on the premise of the legislation we offered last year: that there is no military solution to this conflict and any successful strategy must include a deadline combined with diplomatic, political and economic steps that get Iraqis to make the compromises needed for stability.”

The Senate announcement came in the wake of a similar announcement from the House today, which Kerry also supports.

Kerry Responds to Blair's Redeployment Plan for British Troops Out of Bush's Iraq War

Tony Blair is preparing to cut out of Bush's war. The BBC reported today that Blair will announce a "timetable for the withdrawal of British troops from Iraq, with 1,500 to return home in several weeks," on Wednesday.

Blair will also tell the House of Commons during his regular weekly appearance before it that a total of about 3,000 British soldiers will have left southern Iraq by the end of 2007, if the security there is sufficient, the British Broadcasting Corp. and The Sun newspaper said, quoting government officials who weren’t further identified.

The BBC said Blair was not expected to say when the rest of Britain’s forces would leave Iraq. Currently, Britain has about 7,100 soldiers there.

John Kerry issued the following statement today, in response to Blair’s expected announcement that he would be withdrawing British troops on a fixed timetable, including the redeployment of 1,500 soldiers in the coming weeks and 3,000 troops home by Christmas:

“America’s leading ally in Iraq has decided that a timetable for the phased redeployment of troops is the only responsible policy to help force Iraqis to stand up for Iraq,” said Kerry. “After years of touting Prime Minister Blair’s resolve, the Administration should now pay attention to his new policy. This announcement makes it all the more inexplicable that the President and leading Republicans actually want to send more American troops into the middle of an Iraqi civil war.”

Blair's announcement comes on the heels of Bush's push to escalate the Iraq war with "an increase of 21,000 more troops for Iraq." As Bush's plan to escalate the war, "some of the other coalition partners are pulling out: The Italians and Slovaks have left, and the Danes and the South Koreans want to start withdrawing."

NBC reported that Blair and President Bush spoke about the timetable on Tuesday morning.

The Guardian UK calls the plan, "the British endgame."

John Kerry’s Input To Be Valued

Cross posted from The Democratic Daily:

There was on OP/ED in the Boston Herald today that is so worth the read for Kerry supporters here on the Dem Daily. The OP/ED was written by Jeffrey R. Lewis, president of Heinz Family Philanthropies, who served as Republican staff director to the late Sen. John Heinz (R-Pa.).

One of the key points Lewis makes, as a moderate Republican, is that "on a variety of key and core issues," John Kerry "has been right on the merits and he has gotten to these positions long before the rest of the pack." That's a point we've made here many times here on the Dem Daily -- Kerry was right. (Emphasis added below is mine.)

Kerry’s input to be valued
By Jeffrey R. Lewis
Monday, February 19, 2007

Two years from now, when George Bush leaves office, he will leave behind a tattered domestic policy and a severely frayed foreign policy that in some places of the world is broken, embittered, violent and organized into very different camps whose only common denominator is a raging anti-American sentiment.

On Sept. 11, the world was at our feet, understanding our anguish and offering a hand of friendship. Today, much of the world is after our throat, burning our flag, and using foreign trade and oil as weapons of economic destruction against us.

The question that engages many of us - not as Democrats or Republicans but as human beings - is how to approach the project of restoring America’s place in the world.

America must find a path out of Iraq, rebuild our military, re-engage the fight in Afghanistan, restore our diplomacy - especially in the Middle East - and suture together the security coalitions that this administration tore apart with its preference for unilateral action and its disdain for our allies.

Read more »