San Franciscans Oppose the War. Why Don't Their Representatives?

[bemildred]

Given San Francisco's well deserved reputation as a center of the movement against the war against Iraq, many people outside the city may be surprised to learn that it does not have an antiwar representative in Congress, that is, one who supports withdrawing our troops now – not at some indeterminate time in the future, as Donald Rumsfield assures us we will do. And given that one of its representatives, Nancy Pelosi, is the House Democratic leader, it's not just the city, but the nation that needs an antiwar representative from San Francisco.

In fact, many San Franciscans are themselves quite surprised, shocked even, when they learn that both of their Congressional representatives, Nancy Pelosi and Tom Lantos, opposed a May 25 budget amendment calling upon the President to "develop a plan for the withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Iraq." After all, last November, 63% of the city's voters approved Proposition N, which called on the Federal government to "bring the troops safely home now."

And since Pelosi is the House Democratic leader, there might have been a few Congressional Democrats surprised as well – or at least disappointed, since a 122-79 majority of her own party supported the amendment. On the war, it seems, Pelosi is leading from the rear – her national antiwar image notwithstanding. Oh, she does berate the Bush Administration for its conduct of the war, certainly. Her statement on the May 5 $82 billion supplemental appropriation referred to "repeated failures in judgment that first put our troops in harm's way." But when 58 Democrats voted against the increased war funding, their ranks did not include her – or Lantos. Critic of the war? Yes. Opponent of the war? Not so far.

Certainly she's deft enough. Challenging the President to put what he thinks he's doing in Iraq into words with her resolution demanding that he provide a "plan for success" was a clever enough maneuver, even if was voted down on procedural grounds along nearly absolute party lines. Likewise, few war opponents found fault with her raising Republican hackles by her describing the war as "a grotesque mistake" – although it should be clear by now that while the Administration's war plans were grotesque, they were no mistake.

Common Dreams

[iconoclastic cat]

1. Our elected reps don't give a damn about us anymore.

[Vext]

2. That's why I didn't vote for Lantos last Nov

I voted Green. But if it had been close with a repub I would have had to hold my nose and vote for him.

He does vote ok on a lot of other stuff though.

But I will be giving my love$ to other candidates, not him.

[wli]

3. even Pelosi is bought out? there is no hope

[bemildred]

4. There is hope. Hope is a primary challenge to these weasels. nt

[wli]

5. well, Pelosi's one of the biggest people's advocates, but then this

If this is one of the last bastions of actual representative democracy in Congress, we're in deep doo doo.

[bemildred]

7. Congress, as presently constructed, represents itself, and nobody else.

You cannot be a peoples advocate and at the same time support the War Party in all its dirty deeds, and make sense. The War Party is the enemy of the people.

[KG]

6. why do people keep voting for pols that refuse to represent them?