Advertisement
The bill provides nearly $95 billion in funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan during the next four months and requires the Iraqi government to meet certain benchmarks in the coming months. But it doesn’t set a timetable for troop withdrawal, which Democrats had called for.
Walz explained his vote Thursday morning in a conference call, saying he couldn’t compromise troops’ safety.
“This is a terrible choice that has to be made, but I’m not going to risk the soldiers not getting what they need,” he said.
Walz said he understood that cutting off funding may not translate directly into a shortage of needed equipment abroad. Still, he said, it would hurt training operations for troops preparing for combat situations and potentially send them unprepared into dangerous situations.
The vote was 280-142, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats voting against the bill. Two members of the Minnesota delegation, Democratic Reps. Keith Ellison and Betty McCollum, also voted no.
Walz said he also voted to approve the bill because he doesn’t believe that President Bush would negotiate with Congress if it managed to pass legislation to cut off Iraq funding, and soldiers in the country “regardless of whether they have the resources necessary for their safety.”
Walz said he continues to oppose the United States’ invasion of Iraq, and called the continuing involvement “counterproductive.” He said he will continue to help negotiate a way to pull troops from Iraq.
“The situation in Iraq is deteriorating as we speak, and we need to change it,” he said.
Walz, a Democrat who represents southern Minnesota, is a retired National Guard command sergeant major.
Reporter Brian Voerding can be reached at (507) 453-3514 or at bvoerding@winonadailynews.com
Alan L. Maki wrote on May 25, 2007 4:18 PM: