Vermont lawmakers send a message: Get out of Iraq
|
|
Iraq war veterans Matt Howard, left, and Drew Cameron of Burlington confer Tuesday at the Statehouse in Montpelier. Hopeful lawmakers would demand the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, they were disillusioned after the House approved an amendment they believed compromised too much. AP Photo/Toby Talbot |
Toolbox
By Louis Porter Vermont Press Bureau - Published: February 14, 2007
MONTPELIER — Vermont's Legislature became the first in the country Tuesday to pass a resolution calling for an immediate and orderly withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
Although the Senate passed the measure without change and with little debate, members of the House spent much of the day on the issue and made a few modifications.
The key issue was whether or not the resolution would discourage and demoralize American soldiers, and whether it would carry any weight with the federal administration that oversees the war.
The Senate passed the resolution by a 24-5 vote with one absence. The House passed an amended version of the measure by a 95-52 vote in a debate that drew veterans to the Statehouse halls and saw impassioned comments on both sides.
Gov. James Douglas does not sign or veto nonbinding resolutions.
Matt Howard, a U.S. Marine Corps veteran of two tours in Iraq, said passing the resolution would not send a message to soldiers that the Legislature does not support them.
"They are doing their duty, but that in no way means they want to be there or that they are not counting every second before they can go home," he said.
Howard, a member of a group of Iraq veterans against the war, was in Iraq for the initial push to Baghdad. He drove a supply truck with a tank battalion.
"That is what we do in Iraq, we go out until we get shot at and we hope we can shoot back," Howard said. "That is our grand plan."
In a sign of how divisive the question of the resolution has become, veterans who serve in the House came down on different sides of the debate.
"No one hates war more than a warrior. No father wishes their child would come home more than I," said Rep. Joseph Krawczyk, R-Bennington, a Vietnam veteran who was in the military for decades. "I know that she and all the soldiers who serve with her and those who served with me over 27 years would want me to be loyal to my oath and vote no on this resolution." Krawczyk's daughter is now in the military.
But another House member who fought in Vietnam felt differently.
Rep. John Zenie, D-Colchester, spoke about returning from Southeast Asia after his tour of duty and his feelings about war protests.
"I wish more people had protested sooner so we might have come home even one day earlier," Zenie said.The decision to support or oppose the resolution was a difficult one for some members, including Rep. Patricia O'Donnell, R-Vernon, whose son is in the military and could return to Iraq this year.
"My family has felt the effects of this war and I hate it," she said. But, "this discussion is taking place in the wrong building."
Several lawmakers said they were disappointed the U.S. Congress spent Tuesday debating a resolution opposing the proposed "troop surge" rather than considering a more effective measure to affect the country's policy in Iraq.
In the end, O'Donnell voted for the resolution, after it was amended by the removal of a section stating "the presence of American troops in Iraq has not, and will not, contribute to the stability of that nation, the region or the security of Americans at home or abroad," among other changes.
"I firmly believe we have got to leave Iraq," Adrienne Kinne, of Sharon, a former member of the U.S. Army who served in the United States during the current Iraq War. "The future of Iraq can only be determined by Iraqis."
A co-sponsor of the resolution, Rep. Steve Howard, D-Rutland, said it is time for Vermont and other states to demand accountability and an end to the war in Iraq.
"It is not serving the people of Rutland or the people of Vermont," he said.