Voted NO on banning armed forces in Libya without Congressional approval.
RESOLUTION Declaring that the President shall not deploy, establish, or maintain the presence of US Armed Forces in Libya, pursuant to the War Powers Resolution.The House of Representatives makes the following statements of policy:
The US Armed Forces shall be used exclusively to defend and advance the national security interests of the US.
The President has failed to provide Congress with a compelling rationale based upon US national security interests for current US military activities regarding Libya.
The President shall not deploy, establish, or maintain the presence of units and members of the US Armed Forces on the ground in Libya unless the purpose of the presence is to rescue a member of the Armed Forces from imminent danger.
The President shall transmit a report describing in detail US security interests and objectives, and the activities of US Armed Forces, in Libya since March 19, 2011, including a description of the following:
justification for not seeking authorization by Congress for the use of military force in Libya.
US political and military objectives regarding Libya, including the relationship between the intended objectives and the operational means being employed to achieve them.
Changes in US political and military objectives following the assumption of command by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
Differences between US political and military objectives regarding Libya and those of other NATO member states engaged in military activities.
The specific commitments by the US to ongoing NATO activities regarding Libya.
The anticipated scope and duration of continued US military involvement in Libya.
The costs of military, political, and humanitarian efforts concerning Libya as of June 3, 2011.
Congress has the constitutional prerogative to withhold funding for any unauthorized use of the US States Armed Forces, including for unauthorized activities regarding Libya.
Reference: Resolution on Libya;
; vote number 11-HV410
on Jun 3, 2011
Voted YES on removing US armed forces from Afghanistan.
Congressional Summary:Directs the President, pursuant to the War Powers Resolution, to remove the U.S. Armed Forces from Afghanistan:
by no later than 30 days after this resolution is adopted; or
if the President determines that it is not safe to remove them by such date, by no later than December 31, 2011.
Proponent's Argument for voting Yes: [Rep. Kucinich, D-OH]:The American people oppose this war by a margin of two to one. Nearly 2/3 of Americans say the war isn't worth fighting. We are spending $100 billion per year on this war. There are those who are saying the war could last at least another 10 years. Are we willing to spend another $1 trillion on a war that doesn't have any exit plan, for which there is no timeframe to get out, no endgame, where we haven't defined our mission? The question is not whether we can afford to leave. The question is, can we afford to stay? And I submit we cannot afford to stay.
The counterintelligence strategy of General Petraeus is an abysmal failure, and it needs to be called as such.
Opponent's Argument for voting No: [Rep. Ros-Lehtinen, R-FL]: This resolution would undermine the efforts of our military and our international partners in Afghanistan and would gravely harm our Nation's security. 3,000 people died on Sep. 11 because we walked away once from Afghanistan, thinking that it didn't matter who controlled that country. We were wrong then. Let us not make the same mistake twice. Completing our mission in Afghanistan is essential to keeping our homeland safe. This is about our vital national security interests. It is about doing what is necessary to ensure that al Qaeda and other extremists cannot reestablish safe havens such as the ones they had in Afghanistan when the 9/11 attacks were planned against our Nation and our people. The enemy, indeed, is on the run. It is demoralized and divided. Let us not give up now.
Reference: Resolution on Afghanistan;
; vote number 11-HV193
on Mar 17, 2011
Voted YES on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq.
OnTheIssues.org Explanation: This vote is on referring the impeachment resolution to a Congressional Committee to decide further action (not on impeachment itself).
Congressional Summary: Resolved, That President George W. Bush be impeached for committing the following abuses of power:
Article I--Creating a Secret Propaganda Campaign To Manufacture a False Case for War Against Iraq
Article VI & VIII--Invading Iraq in Violation of H.J. Res. 114, the U.N. Charter and International Criminal Law
Article X--Falsifying Accounts of US Troop Deaths and Injuries for Political Purposes
Article XI--Establishment of Permanent US Military Bases in Iraq
Article XII--Initiating a War Against Iraq for Control of That Nation's Natural Resources
Article XVII--Detaining Indefinitely and Without Charge Persons Both US Citizens and Foreign Captives
Article XXIV--Spying on American Citizens, Without a Court-Ordered Warrant, in Violation of the
Article XXVI--Announcing the Intent To Violate Laws With Signing Statements, and Violating Those Laws
Proponents' arguments for voting YEA: Rep. Kucinich: Now is the time for this Congress to examine the actions that led us into this war, just as we must work to bring our troops home. This resolution is a very serious matter and I urge the Committee on Judiciary to investigate and carefully consider this resolution.
Rep. Wasserman-Schultz: Impeachment is a lengthy process which would divide Congress and this nation even more deeply than we are divided right now. Referring this resolution to the House Judiciary Committee is the constitutionally appropriate process that should be pursued.
Rep. Ron Paul: I rise, reluctantly, in favor of referring that resolution to the House Judiciary Committee for full consideration, which essentially directs the committee to examine the issue more closely than it has done to this point.
Reference: The Kucinich Privilege Resolution;
; vote number 2008-401
on Jun 11, 2008
Voted YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days.
To provide for the redeployment of US Armed Forces and defense contractors from Iraq. Requires within 90 days to commence the redeployment; and to complete such redeployment within 180 days after its commencement. Prohibits the use of DOD funds to increase the number of US forces serving in Iraq in excess of the number serving in Iraq as of January 1, 2007, unless specifically authorized by Congress. Authorizes retaining in Iraq US forces for providing security for diplomatic missions; for targeting al-Qaeda; and for training Iraqi Security Forces. Requires the President to transfer to the government of Iraq all interest held by the US in any military facility in Iraq.
Proponents support voting YES because:
This war is a terrible tragedy, and it is time to bring it to an end. This is a straightforward bill to redeploy our military forces from Iraq and to end the war in Iraq. This bill does not walk away from the Iraqi people.
It specifically continues diplomatic, social, economic, and reconstruction aid. Finally, this bill leaves all the decisions on the locations outside of Iraq to which our troops will be redeployed wholly in the hands of our military commanders.
Opponents support voting NO because:
This legislation embraces surrender and defeat. This legislation undermines our troops and the authority of the President as commander in chief. Opponents express concern about the effects of an ill-conceived military withdrawal, and about any legislation that places military decisions in the hands of politicians rather than the military commanders in the field. The enemy we face in Iraq view this bill as a sign of weakness. Now is not the time to signal retreat and surrender. It is absolutely essential that America, the last remaining superpower on earth, continue to be a voice for peace and a beacon for freedom in our shrinking world.
Reference: Out of Iraq Caucus bill;
Bill H R 2237
; vote number 2007-330
on May 10, 2007
Voted NO on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date.
Voting YES would support the following resolution (excerpted):
Whereas the United States and its allies are engaged in a Global War on Terror, a long and demanding struggle against an adversary that is driven by hatred of American values and that is committed to imposing, by the use of terror, its repressive ideology throughout the world;
Whereas the terrorists have declared Iraq to be the central front in their war against all who oppose their ideology;
Whereas the United States and its Coalition partners will continue to support Iraq as part of the Global War on Terror:
Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
Honors all those Americans who have taken an active part in the Global War on Terror;
Declares that it is not in the national security interest of the United States to set an arbitrary date for the withdrawal or redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq;
Declares that the United States is committed to the completion of
the mission to create a sovereign, free, secure, and united Iraq;
Declares that the United States will prevail in the Global War on Terror, the noble struggle to protect freedom from the terrorist adversary.
Reference: Resolution on Prevailing in the Global War on Terror;
Bill HRES 861
; vote number 2006-288
on Jun 12, 2006
Voted NO on approving removal of Saddam & valiant service of US troops.
States that the House of Representatives:
affirms that the United States and the world have been made safer with the removal of Saddam Hussein and his regime from power in Iraq;
commends the Iraqi people for their courage in the face of unspeakable oppression and brutality inflicted on them by Saddam Hussein's regime;
commends the Iraqi people on the adoption of Iraq's interim constitution; and
commends the members of the U.S. Armed Forces and Coalition forces for liberating Iraq and expresses its gratitude for their valiant service.
Reference: War in Iraq Anniversary resolution;
Bill H Res 557
; vote number 2004-64
on Mar 17, 2004
Voted NO on authorizing military force in Iraq.
Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq: Passage of the joint resolution that would authorize President Bush to use the US military as he deems necessary and appropriate to defend U.S. national security against Iraq and enforce UN Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq. It would be required that the president report to Congress, no later than 48 hours after using force, his determination that diplomatic options or other peaceful means would not guarantee US national security against Iraq or allow enforcement of UN resolutions and that using force is consistent with anti-terrorism efforts. The resolution would also give specific statutory authorization under the War Powers Resolution. Every 60 days the president would also be required to report to Congress on actions related to the resolution.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Hastert,R-IL;
; vote number 2002-455
on Oct 10, 2002
Voted YES on disallowing the invasion of Kosovo.
Vote on an amendment to the "Kosovo and Southwest Asia Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act" which would prohibit the use of funds for any invasion of Yugoslavia with U.S. ground forces except in time of war.
Reference: Amendment introduced by Istook, R-OK;
Bill HR 1664
; vote number 1999-119
on May 6, 1999
Condemns anti-Muslim bigotry in name of anti-terrorism.
Towns co-sponsored the Resolution on bigotry against Sikh Americans:
Title: Condemning bigotry and violence against Sikh Americans in the wake of terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001.
Summary: Declares that, in the quest to identify, locate, and bring to justice the perpetrators and sponsors of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, the civil rights and liberties of all Americans, including Sikh-Americans, should be protected.
Condemns bigotry and acts of violence or discrimination against any Americans, including Sikh-Americans.
Calls upon local and Federal law enforcement authorities to: (1) work to prevent hate crimes against all Americans; and (2) prosecute to the fullest extent of the law all those who commit hate crimes.
Source: House Resolution Sponsorship 01-HR255 on Oct 4, 2001
Impeach Dick Cheney for lying about Iraq.
Towns co-sponsored impeaching Dick Cheney for lying about Iraq
Sets forth articles of impeachment stating that Vice President Cheney:
has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, to justify the use of the U.S. Armed Forces against Iraq in a manner damaging to U.S. national security interests; and
has openly threatened aggression against Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and has done so with the U.S. proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining U.S. national security.
Bill has 24 co-sponsors. Related Bill H.RES.799 came up for vote on Nov. 6, 2007, but was considered as "privileged matter," then failed a motion to table (kill the bill), and finally was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Source: Motion to Impeach Vice President Richard Cheney (H.RES.333) 07-HR333 on May 4, 2007
Member of the Out-of-Iraq Congressional Caucus.
Towns is a member the Out-of-Iraq Congressional Caucus
The Out of Iraq Caucus was created in June 2005 to unite members of the House in favor of returning American troops from Iraq. The group's chair, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) said the following when announcing its formation:
"The Out of Iraq Congressional Working Group is a newly formed effort whose sole purpose is to be the main agitators in the movement to bring our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. Our efforts will include the coordination of activities and legislation designed to achieve our goal of returning our troops home. Through floor statements, press conferences, TV and radio appearances and other actions, we will provide leadership for the American Public who has been waiting too long for our collective voices against the war."
In a speech on the floor of the House shortly after the group's first meeting, Waters emphasized that the group was not calling for an exit from Iraq on any specific date. Rather, she said it more generally opposed a continued U.S. presence in the country. Waters promised that the caucus would do the following towards this aim:
Provide support to other members of Congress and caucuses who wish to leave Iraq.
Provide support to citizens and organized national groups who wish to leave Iraq.
Organize workshops and seminars for the purpose of encouraging an exit from Iraq.
Travel across the country to explain the rationale for their position.
Be available to meet with the families of service members who have been killed or injured in Iraq.
Source: Out-of-Iraq Caucus website 07-OIC0 on Jan 23, 2007
Strengthen sanctions on Syria & assist democratic transition.
Towns co-sponsored strengthening sanctions on Syria & assist democratic transition
A bill to strengthen sanctions against the Government of Syria, to enhance multilateral commitment to address the Government of Syria's threatening policies, to establish a program to support a transition to a democratically-elected government in Syria.
Syria Accountability and Liberation Act - States that US sanctions, controls, and regulations relating to Syria shall remain in effect until the President certifies that Syria has ceased support for terrorism, has dismantled biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons programs and has committed to combat their proliferation, respects the boundaries and sovereignty of all neighboring countries, and upholds human rights and civil liberties.
Imposes specified trade, assistance, and military sanctions, as appropriate, on persons or countries that transfer goods or technology so as to contribute to Syria's biological, chemical, nuclear, or advanced conventional weapons programs.
Imposes specified sanctions aimed at Syria's energy sector.
Sets forth diplomatic measures intended to isolate the government of Syria.
Directs the President to provide assistance to support a democratic transition in Syria. Authorizes appropriations.
Source: Syria Accountability and Liberation Act (S2917/HR2332) 08-S2917 on Apr 24, 2008
No contact & enforce sanctions on Iran until threat is gone.
Towns co-sponsored Iran Threat Reduction Act
Iran Energy Sanctions: Compelling Iran to abandon its pursuit of nuclear weapons and other threatening activities can be achieved most effectively through full implementation of all enacted sanctions. Declares that it is US policy to deny Iran the ability to support acts of foreign terrorist organizations and develop unconventional weapons.
Iran Freedom Support: States that specified sanctions regarding Iran shall remain in effect until the President certifies to Congress that the government of Iran has dismantled its nuclear weapons, biological and chemical weapons, and ballistic missile development programs; and ceased its support for international terrorism.
Iran Regime and Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Accountability: Prohibits any US person from knowingly conducting any commercial transaction with any IRGC-owned entity or any foreign entity that conducts any transaction with the IRGC.
Iran Financial Sanctions:
Divestment from Certain Companies that Invest in Iran; and Prevention of Diversion of Certain Goods, Services, and Technologies to Iran.
Opponent's Comments (Robert Naiman on Huffington Post, Dec. 13, 2011):This bill would restore as policy the "Cooties Doctrine" of the early Bush Administration--US officials can't meet with officials of the adversary, because our officials might get contaminated. It seems highly doubtful that the provision is constitutional, since it tries to micromanage the executive branch in its conduct of foreign affairs. But putting the legal issuesaside, isn't the logic of this provision completely counter to the argument that we voted for in Nov. 2008: that it's ok--indeed, it is wise, prudent, and preferable--for the US to be able to talk to its adversaries?
Result: Bill passed the House on Dec. 15, 2011, by a vote of 410-11 (rollcall vote #927). Referred to Senate, where there was no vote before adjournment.
Boycott & sanctions against Iran for terrorism & nukes.
Towns signed Iran Threat Reduction Act
Declares that it is US policy to deny Iran the ability to support acts of foreign terrorist organizations and develop unconventional weapons and ballistic missiles.
Urges the President to initiate diplomatic efforts to expand the multilateral sanctions regime regarding Iran.
Directs the President to impose specified sanctions on a person who knowingly makes specified investments with respect to Iran's ability to develop petroleum resources; or exports to any items that would contribute to Iran's ability to acquire or develop chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons, or acquire or develop destabilizing numbers and types of advanced conventional weapons.
Defines sanctions to include: prohibitions on loans from US financial institutions; prohibitions on foreign exchange; prohibitions on property transactions; and export and procurement sanctions.
States that a determination to impose sanctions under this Act shall not be reviewable in any court.
Authorizes financial and political assistance to entities that support democracy in Iran.
Imposes visa, property, and financial sanctions on persons identified as officials of the government of Iran, security services, or the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Directs the President to develop a National Strategy to Counter Iran.
Requires a report on the Central Bank of Iran's activities to facilitate Iran's efforts to acquire nuclear missile capacities, and promote terrorism.
Terminates the provisions of this Act when Iran:
has dismantled its efforts to develop or acquire nuclear, chemical and biological weapons;
no longer provides support for acts of international terrorism; and
poses no threat to US national security, interests, or allies.
A BILL: To prohibit the use of funds to maintain United States Armed Forces and military contractors in Iraq after December 31, 2011.
Congress makes the following findings:
The Agreement Between the US and the Republic of Iraq states that the deadline for withdrawal of US Armed Forces from Iraq is December 31, 2011.
The American people support the withdrawal of US Armed Forces from Iraq by the agreed upon deadline of December 31, 2011, and during the campaign of then presidential candidate Barack Obama, the President stated that he would end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home.
It is estimated that the US will save tens of billions of dollars by bringing all US Armed Forces and military contractors safely home from Iraq by the agreed upon deadline of December 31, 2011.
Leaving US Armed Forces in Iraq beyond the deadline is not in US security interests, strategic interests, and economic interests.
STATEMENTS OF POLICY:
It is the policy of the US to withdraw all US Armed Forces and military contractors from Iraq by December 31, 2011.
No funds may be used to maintain US Armed Forces or military contractors in Iraq after December 31, 2011.
No funds may be used to establish any military installation or base for the purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of US Armed Forces in Iraq.
No funds may be used to exercise United States control over any oil resource of Iraq.
Exceptions: shall not apply to the use of funds for US Armed Forces for protection of the US Embassy in Baghdad, Iraq.