The DeFazio amendment (barring an attack on Iran without Congressional authorization) will be on the House floor today. If you are the sort of person who can occasionally be prevailed upon to call the office of your Representative, today would be a good day. The Capitol switchboard is 202-225-3121.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-dems-indicate-they-are-more-united-on-iran-legislation-2007-05-15.html House Dems indicate they are more united on Iran legislation By Roxana Tiron May 16, 2007 House Democrats, who have been divided on whether the president needs authorization from Congress to attack Iran, suggested yesterday that they are more united on the controversial issue. But with Iran measures possibly headed to the House floor as early as today, it is unclear if Democrats have the votes to pass legislation calling for the president to seek authorization from Congress for a preemptive strike on Iran. House Democratic leaders initially attempted to insert Iran language in their now-vetoed Iraq supplemental bill after some New York Democrats, including Reps. Eliot Engel and Gary Ackerman, balked at the language. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), an influential group that advocates strong U.S. ties with Israel, lobbied heavily to remove the Iran provision in the supplemental, arguing that the measure would weaken President Bush's attempts to dissuade Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Needing every vote they could get, House leaders dropped the provisions before narrowly passing the Iraq measure. After striking the language, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) promised several members, including Reps. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), and Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.), that she would allow for an up-or-down vote on an Iran amendment, though it is unclear which amendment or amendments will be voted on. In the 109th Congress, Iran amendments offered by DeFazio and Hinchey were easily defeated. But a new amendment by Rep. Robert Andrews (D-N.J.) could attract the most votes. His measure would prevent funds authorized in the bill for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan from being obligated or expended to plan a contingency operation in Iran. Andrews said in an interview that he has spoken to House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) about his amendment to the pending defense authorization legislation. "He will be supportive of this approach because it balances the assertion of our constitutional prerogative with the needs of the military to act in case of an emergency," Andrews said. "I think the chairman would agree. He and I share the view to strike that balance." At press time, the House Rules Committee was still deliberating which amendments it will clear for votes today. Skelton did not comment by press time about his position on the issue, though he did indicate that a few Iran amendments may be approved by the Rules Committee. Skelton voted against DeFazio's amendment in 2005 that would have prohibited the administration from initiating military operations against Syria, Iran, North Korea or other potential rogue nations without authorization from Congress. Skelton also voted against the Hinchey amendment to the fiscal year 2007 defense appropriations bill that would have prohibited any of the funds made available to initiate military operations against Iran with the exception of an attack on the United States, its military or interests. Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the chairman of the House defense appropriations subcommittee, also voted against the amendments in 2005 and 2006. But it was Murtha, a staunch Iraq war opponent who this year pushed for the language in the supplemental prohibiting military action in Iran without congressional authorization. While Pelosi voted for the DeFazio and Hinchey amendments, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (Md.) voted against both measures. At his pen-and-pad session yesterday, Hoyer said, "I believe that any action anywhere that is not a response to an attack on the United States requires congressional authorization. I have made that point, whether it is Iran or any other country." If it is an attack on the United States the commander in chief has the authority to retaliate, but if that is not the case, Hoyer said, "I don't think that he can go into Iran or any place else without that authorization." Amendments on that issue, Hoyer said, "will be carefully considered by the Rules Committee." He added, however, that it is "a constitutional premise that only Congress can authorize the country to an active attack or war with another entity or another nation." In an interview, McDermott said, "Congress has to take its responsibility of declaring war seriously." McDermott, along with Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), believe that the Bush administration is committed to going to war with Iran. Congress can't allow the president to bomb Iran based on "the flimsy resolution we passed four years ago," McDermott added. The White House has refused to commit to seeking the approval of Congress on a potential future conflict with Iran. Critics of the Iran amendments have said that it would tie the military's hands, claiming that Iran has provoked unrest in Iraq. "I think it is more imperative than ever," said DeFazio. "There are ongoing assertions from the Bush administration that either the Iraq authorization or the 9/11 authorization allows the president a free hand in Iran…[and] Dick Cheney is starting to beat the war drum." DeFazio, together with Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Hinchey, offered an Iran amendment while Hinchey also offered separate language. House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) voted in favor of the DeFazio and Hinchey amendments last Congress. House Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) voted in favor of the DeFazio amendment and against the Hinchey amendment. AIPAC is likely going to oppose renewed efforts in the House. Hoyer is close with Howard Friedman, a Baltimore-area constituent who is president of AIPAC. Hoyer is one of the top recipients of pro-Israel groups' political contributions. On the opposite end of the spectrum, retired Gen. Wesley Clark (D) together with Jon Soltz of VoteVets.org created a grassroots effort named StopIranWar.com. Their argument, apart from advocating diplomacy with Iran, is that a U.S. attack on Iran would be detrimental to Israel's security. Ilan Wurman contributed to this report.
