Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
John Boehner :: Townhall.com Columnist
We Need a Clean Troop Funding Bill, and We Need It Now
by John Boehner
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


House Republicans will have no trouble sustaining the President's veto of a Democratic bill that shamefully ties critical troop funding to a series of arbitrary conditions and timelines, not to mention billions in unrelated spending. And while Democrats are now toying with idea of rationing support for our troops in the short-term while they find another way to force a withdrawal, that won't work either. What we need is a clean bill - an up or down vote on giving our troops the resources they need to succeed.

For the benefit of those who think "supporting the troops" means choking off their resources and undermining their mission, here is a brief primer on what a clean bill should look like.

First of all, a clean bill will not tie troop funding to a surrender date. Democrats repeatedly say the war in Iraq is "lost" and make the peculiar argument that America should instead "go after the terrorists where they are." They should listen to their House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) who has admitted al Qaeda has a "very significant presence" in Iraq. He's right - al Qaeda's presence in Iraq is real and it is deadly, and it is foolish to think that withdrawing would somehow diminish the threat it poses.

There is no doubt that al Qaeda would benefit from America's failure. Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) has soberly reminded his colleagues that, over the last few years, every time "U.S. forces pulled back, al Qaeda rushed in" to fill the void. The long-term consequences of a retreat would be devastating for America's national security, fostering further regional chaos and providing fertile ground for al Qaeda to plot future attacks.

Democrats should also listen to the Washington Post's David Broder who lambasted the mistaken argument that "the military effort is lost but a diplomatic-political strategy can succeed." In fact, General Petraeus has insisted that "military action is necessary to help improve security" in Iraq. Circling a surrender date on the calendar will do nothing to help our soldiers succeed in Iraq, and it will do nothing to further political and diplomatic progress.

Second, a clean bill will not tie troop funding to arbitrary conditions. Democrats claim they want "benchmarks." But benchmarks, by definition, are used to measure progress so that adjustments can be recommended periodically - based on results - to improve weaknesses and build upon strengths. What Democrats have actually authored and supported are a series of unrealistic conditions and timelines that choke off resources for our troops.

While General Petraeus calls al Qaeda "public enemy number one," Democrats have purposely written a bill that limits his ability to take them on. Last week the general described areas of Iraq like al Anbar province where Sunni Arab tribes are "linking arms" with American and Iraqi forces to combat al Qaeda. A clean bill will help American forces root out and disrupt terrorist forces - it will not handcuff our generals by putting arbitrary limits and conditions on their resources.

And lastly, a clean bill will not tie troop funding to excess spending. Democrats have openly admitted they "don't have the votes" to pass an emergency war supplemental, and so resorted to buying votes with billions in unrelated spending. The bill passed by the House and Senate was loaded with billions of dollars that has absolutely nothing to do with American troops or veterans, including money for production of salmon, cows, pigs, and dairy products.

But there's a better way. If Democratic leaders do the right thing - and put forward a bill that supports our troops without conditions, without surrender dates, and without all of the excess spending - Republicans will be there to support them.

Democrats claim they want to "change course," but they have failed to explain what they want to accomplish by retreating from the Global War on Terror. Given the nature of our enemy and the long-term consequences of failure, the only course Democrats have charted is the road to danger.

We need a clean troop funding bill that gives our troops the resources they need to succeed in the Global War on Terror, and we need it now. Let's get it done and let's get a bill to the President's desk as soon as possible.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

John Boehner is the Republican Minority Leader for the House of Representatives.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY:

Be the first to read John Boehner's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

What does clear funding look like?
As an Air Force spouse, I completely agree that more funding is needed. However, from an insider's perspective, it makes a great deal of difference WHERE the money goes.
While it is true that funding is necessary to keep our operations overseas running effectively, I believe we need to do more than skim the surface with our lamentations about funding.
More money should go into the paychecks of our enlisted troops. Plain and simple. They are sadly underpaid, especially at the lowest enlisted levels. That alone would boost morale and boost re-enlistment.
My husband is an officer. We make enough. There are tens of thousands of young people out there fighting this war for all of us, and their sacrifice deserves more of an economic value than it is currently receiving.
There are thousands of dollars of "extra funding" allocated to various parts of our military (and government for that matter) that is not needed or necessary; funding that is set up in a manner causes the funding to be spent, needed or not, or it is lost. That needs to be cleaned up.
The money is there. It won't take higher taxes to appropriately fund our men and women who so greatly deserve it. Our tax dollars need to be reallocated and spent in a manner that will truly make a difference to our troops.

hal
i am not sure if i missed something but it sounds like you are experiencing health problems.
if so, you will be in all of our prayers i am sure.

you are a reasonable and civil voice of reason on this post, i always look forward to reading your posts for your inciteful take on things.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.