The Iraq War Tax updated
Rep. Obey is on
the warpath today.
“I would be more than willing to report out a supplemental meeting
the President’s request if that request were made in support of a change
in policy that would do three things.
— “Establish as a goal the end of U.S. involvement in combat operations
by January of 2009.”– “Ensure that troops would have adequate time at home between deployments
as outlined in the Murtha and Webb amendments.”– “Demonstrate a determination to engage in an intensive, broad scale
diplomatic offensive involving other countries in the region.”“But this policy does not do that. It simply borrows almost $200 billion
to give to the Departments of State, Defense, Energy, and Justice with no
change in sight.“As Chairman of the Appropriations Committee I have absolutely no intention
of reporting out of Committee anytime in this session of Congress any such
request that simply serves to continue the status quo.”Approps
Chair Obey Says He’ll Block Funding For War Without Withdrawal Date
But under the radar is the best idea I’ve seen yet. You want the war? Pay as you blow things away.
He wants a war spending bill to end U.S. involvement in combat operations
by January 2009, allow more rest time for troops between deployments and start
a “diplomatic surge.”Obey also came out in favor of Rep. James McGovern’s (D-Mass.) war
tax proposal.“If you don’t like the cost, then shut down the war,” Obey
said in a news conference.The tax would be intended to raise roughly $150 billion for the war. It would
be a surtax of 2 to 15 percent of income tax. A 2 percent surtax means that
a person who would otherwise pay $100 in taxes would pay $102. … ..
War tax aside, as for Rep. David Obey, he is not one of my favorites, as you can read for yourself in this post. Proceed with caution.
UPDATE: I’ve supported Speaker Pelosi all along, but her idea of fighting is why Democrats keep losing votes and why we’re still stuck on defense on Iraq.
Comments are closed.