Introduced by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, the measure failed by a vote of 356-65. Five Republicans joined 60 Democrats in voting for the resolution.

While Kucinich’s measure was never expected to pass, it nevertheless marked the first legislative challenge to the Afghan war since Obama announced the deployment of an additional 30,000 troops in a speech at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point on December 1. The debate — and an earlier procedural vote, which saw 225 lawmakers vote to allow the measure to proceed to the House floor — also revealed the depth of antiwar sentiment among the president’s liberal allies in Congress.

“Unless this Congress acts to claim its constitutional responsibility, we will stay in Afghanistan for a very, very long time, at great cost to our troops and to our national priorities,” said Kucinich, holding aloft a pocket-sized copy of the Constitution, in preliminary remarks on the House floor. “Or we can set a date — December 31, 2010 — by which we must leave. And this is exactly what the resolution seeks to do.”

Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, countered by invoking the memory of Army Specialist Jarrett Griemel, a 20-year-old Texas native and member of the 25th Infantry Division Battalion who died last June from injuries he sustained in Afghanistan.

“He believed in protecting our country,” Poe said of Griemel. “He believed in it so much he was willing to leave his wife and go halfway around the world to fight an enemy on the enemy’s own turf. And he believed it so much he was willing to give his life for the rest of us. So [if] we pass this resolution, what message do we send to Jared’s family or young bride? That his sacrifice just wasn’t enough? That it was all for naught? We don’t quit war because war is hard. War has always been hard.”

Rep. Patrick Kennedy D-R.I., was the most animated lawmaker, at times shouting himself hoarse in support for the Kucinich measure on the House floor.

Some lawmakers crossed party lines to adopt their stance on the Kucinich measure, which had sixteen co-sponsors.

“This war is an illegal war. This war is an amoral war. This war is an unconstitutional war,” said Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas. “The consequence of 9/11 will be that we will bog the American people in a no-win war and demoralize the people…The country is totally bankrupt and we’re spending billions of dollars on these useless wars…History shows that all empires end because they expand too far and they bankrupt the country, just as the Soviet system came down. And that’s what bin Laden was hoping for.”

Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., chairman of the Armed Services Committee, warned his colleagues not to “undermine recent gains” in the war against the terrorist networks. “Have we forgotten what happened to America on 9/11?” Skelton said. “Have we forgotten who did it? Have we forgotten those who protected [al-Aqeda] and gave them a safehaven?” Afghanistan, Skelton said, “is the epicenter of terrorism….After eight long years we have a strategy for success in Afghanistan and we have a president who appointed the right leaders…Success is not guaranteed in this mission. But passing this resolution guarantees failure in Afghanistan and poses a risk — a serious risk — that we will once again face the same situation that existed on September 11, 2001.”

Supporters of the resolution contended the Obama administration lacks a legal basis under the War Powers Act for ongoing military operations in Afghanistan. The 1973 law was enacted in response to repeated escalations of the Vietnam War, by successive White Houses, with limited assent from the Congress. The law requires the president to seek re-authorization from the legislature if he deploys troops for longer than ninety days.

Congress passed a resolution authorizing the use of military force in Afghanistan in 2001, one week after the terrorist attacks of September 11. Advocates of continued U.S. operations against the Taliban and Al Qaeda, the two major terrorist networks active in Afghanistan, contended the 2001 resolution still provides formal authority for Obama to continue the war effort. That effort is now in its ninth year, with an estimated 1,000 American lives lost.

This action is being done pursuant to the war powers act. The war powers act was passed in 1973, it was passed to claim congresses constitutional authority , under article 1 section 8. To be able to take our troops to war, and to stay at war.

Congress cannot remain at the sidelines in this matter. We have the lives of our troops at stake. We have trillions of dollars at stake. Congress must engage in this debate.

Its comforting to let the president to everything, but we’re cannot do that. Whether we agree with the President or not WE have the responsibility. A constitutional responsibility, to make a decision on these wars.

This is not a democrat or republican issue. We’ve learned recently that US contractors are paying the Taliban, to ensure safe shipment of US goods, to US soldiers who then use those supplies to strengthen their war with the Taliban.

We have learned that black water is involved in black ops, working as independent contractors, for the purpose of assassination.

We cannot let things happen without congress being involved in taking direct responsibility.

Did the invasion of Iraq make us safer? Over on million innocent people perished in a war based on a Lie! Let us never forget that.

To those who say war is inevitable, I say your wrong. PEACE is inevitable if you TELL THE TRUTH.

Washington, Nov 7 -
After voting against H.R. 3962 – Affordable Health Care for America Act, Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today made the following statement:

“We have been led to believe that we must make our health care choices only within the current structure of a predatory, for-profit insurance system which makes money not providing health care. We cannot fault the insurance companies for being what they are. But we can fault legislation in which the government incentivizes the perpetuation, indeed the strengthening, of the for-profit health insurance industry, the very source of the problem. When health insurance companies deny care or raise premiums, co-pays and deductibles they are simply trying to make a profit. That is our system.

“Clearly, the insurance companies are the problem, not the solution. They are driving up the cost of health care. Because their massive bureaucracy avoids paying bills so effectively, they force hospitals and doctors to hire their own bureaucracy to fight the insurance companies to avoid getting stuck with an unfair share of the bills. The result is that since 1970, the number of physicians has increased by less than 200% while the number of administrators has increased by 3000%. It is no wonder that 31 cents of every health care dollar goes to administrative costs, not toward providing care. Even those with insurance are at risk. The single biggest cause of bankruptcies in the U.S. is health insurance policies that do not cover you when you get sick.

“But instead of working toward the elimination of for-profit insurance, H.R. 3962 would put the government in the role of accelerating the privatization of health care. In H.R. 3962, the government is requiring at least 21 million Americans to buy private health insurance from the very industry that causes costs to be so high, which will result in at least $70 billion in new annual revenue, much of which is coming from taxpayers. This inevitably will lead to even more costs, more subsidies, and higher profits for insurance companies — a bailout under a blue cross.

“By incurring only a new requirement to cover pre-existing conditions, a weakened public option, and a few other important but limited concessions, the health insurance companies are getting quite a deal. The Center for American Progress’ blog, Think Progress, states “since the President signaled that he is backing away from the public option, health insurance stocks have been on the rise.” Similarly, healthcare stocks rallied when Senator Max Baucus introduced a bill without a public option. Bloomberg reports that Curtis Lane, a prominent health industry investor, predicted a few weeks ago that “money will start flowing in again” to health insurance stocks after passage of the legislation. Investors.com last month reported that pharmacy benefit managers share prices are hitting all-time highs, with the only industry worry that the Administration would reverse its decision not to negotiate Medicare Part D drug prices, leaving in place a Bush Administration policy.

“During the debate, when the interests of insurance companies would have been effectively challenged, that challenge was turned back. The “robust public option” which would have offered a modicum of competition to a monopolistic industry was whittled down from an initial potential enrollment of 129 million Americans to 6 million. An amendment which would have protected the rights of states to pursue single-payer health care was stripped from the bill at the request of the Administration. Looking ahead, we cringe at the prospect of even greater favors for insurance companies.

“Recent rises in unemployment indicate a widening separation between the finance economy and the real economy. The finance economy considers the health of Wall Street, rising corporate profits, and banks’ hoarding of cash, much of it from taxpayers, as sign of an economic recovery. However in the real economy — in which most Americans live — the recession is not over. Rising unemployment, business failures, bankruptcies and foreclosures are still hammering Main Street.

“This health care bill continues the redistribution of wealth to Wall Street at the expense of America’s manufacturing and service economies which suffer from costs other countries do not have to bear, especially the cost of health care. America continues to stand out among all industrialized nations for its privatized health care system. As a result, we are less competitive in steel, automotive, aerospace and shipping while other countries subsidize their exports in these areas through socializing the cost of health care.

“Notwithstanding the fate of H.R. 3962, America will someday come to recognize the broad social and economic benefits of a not-for-profit, single-payer health care system, which is good for the American people and good for America’s businesses, with of course the notable exceptions being insurance and pharmaceuticals.”

View original post by Congressman Dennis Kucinich