It's the Iraq recession economy, stupid

The buzz here in DC this week includes two main messages:

Number one, until we end the war in Iraq, we'll be unable to address other pressing issues in our nation, and the continuation of the war is the main factor driving the worsening economy. Many Democratic policy analysts and spokespeople are starting to call the slowdown the "Iraq Recession."

Number two, "Is the surge working?" is a largely irrelevant question. Instead, voters and candidates need to be asking "What do we do about Iraq to make our nation stronger and safer?"

Ten congressional challengers answered the latter question Monday with "A Responsible Plan to End the War in Iraq," unveiled at the Take Back America conference and online. Their main point is that we can end the war responsibly, rejecting the conventional wisdom that our only good choices are endless occupation or a destabilizing withdrawal. Other key aims include using U.S. diplomatic power, addressing humanitarian concerns, restoring our Constitution, restoring our military, restoring media independence, and creating a new, U.S.-centered energy policy.

But the economic argument for ending the war may well have the most traction this election year. "We have a bridge in my district that's about ready to fall into Lake Washington and we can't repair it because my district's sending all its money to Iraq," said candidate Darcy Burner of Washington's 8th District, who organized Monday's event. In fact, the war's $526 billion cost to date has cost each U.S. family of four $16,500 and each congressional district more than a billion bucks. Burner said that when she asks people in her Puget Sound-area district what they'd do to improve the economy, most say "end the war."

The war's effect on the economy clearly needs to be a factor in the presidential and congressional races, and I hope to see our Idaho candidates embrace this plan. But savvy state legislative and even local candidates must realize that the war's costs are crimping our ability to provide essential services at every level of government, from repairing roads and bridges to maintaining state National Guards. It's time to stop the bloodletting, both in human and economic terms.

Comments

[John Foster/Minnick for Congress]

Excellent post, Julie. One of the great frustrations of this war is that none of us were asked for a nation-wide shared sacrifice for the good of the country. And now our children and grandchildren will make just such a sacrifice for many decades to come.

You're right, it's critical that people begin to see the war through an economic lens. Walt is campaigning in North Idaho, but I'll make sure he sees your post.

Can you tell us more about Burner's presentation? Who were the other congressional challengers participating?

[Julie in Boise]

Sure, John.

Six of the 10 original endorsers spoke at yesterday's unveiling of the plan. (You can see the full list of the 10 at the Responsible Plan website. Click my name.) Just a few more notes from them ...

Burner said she kept waiting for a plan like this to emerge from DC, but when it never did, she started working on it six months ago. Burner's brother Jason was in the invading force that entered Baghdad five years ago this week.

Donna Edwards (MD-04) started her presentation by reminding everyone that in addition to the nearly 4,000 U.S. troops killed, 29,000 have been injured with injuries so severe that they probably would have died in earlier wars. She spoke of going to Walter Reed recently and seeing triple amputees and people with serious brain injuries, which are the hallmark injury of this war. She said we can best honor their sacrifices by valuing their colleagues and getting them out of harm's way.

Chellie Pingree (Maine-01) said that although the media claim that Iraq has faded from voters' minds, she isn't finding that to be true in her months on the campaign trail. "It's like a focus group out there every day," she said, with people wondering how we'll end the war, lessen our dependence on foreign oil, and restore congressional oversight and media responsibility. This plan does all those things, she noted.

Tom Perriello (VA-05) told us a "tale of two dictators," contrasting the way we removed Saddam with the way we took out Liberian dictator Charles Taylor "without firing a shot." (Perriello was involved in that ... see his bio here http://www.perrielloforcongress.com/lifeservice.html). He spoke of a need to pursue a new foreign policy based on what he called "justice-based security."

Sam (Siobhan) Bennett (PA-15) was the one who explored the theme of the false choice between endless war and a destabilizing withdrawal. Like several others in the group, Bennett comes from a military family and was living in Saigon during the fall, where she watched her surgeon father treat children maimed by the war.

Jared Polis (CO-02) wrapped up the presentations by noting that the war is "exporting instability" globally and that most Iraqis want us to leave. He said that the endorsers of the Burner plan are seeking to take leadership before they are elected and that he hopes many of the Democrats who are already in Congress will follow suit.