FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT
FILIBUSTERING WAR FUNDING
Military Families
Speak Out (MFSO) has called on Senators to filibuster the Iraq war funding
bills that Congress is about to vote on. Many people have
asked us why MFSO is calling for a filibuster and how a filibuster might stop
funding for the war, bring the war in Iraq to an end and get our troops home. These
questions are directed specifically at the filibuster – we have additional talking
points on our website (click
here)about de-funding the war in general.
What is a filibuster?
A filibuster is a tool used in the U.S. Senate that allows
debates to go on indefinitely, with the
impact of preventing a vote on(and
therefore passage of) a piece of legislation.
There are no provisions under Senate rules limiting how long
a Senator can speak, and once a Senator is speaking she or he can yield the
floor to another Senator.So a Senator
or a group of Senators can prevent a vote by refusing to stop speaking until a
bill is changed or withdrawn.
The only way to stop a filibuster is to get 60 Senators to
vote for a "cloture motion" that ends debate and forces a vote. This
means 41 Senators can stop a bill from passing!
Senators have regularly used the filibuster prevent the
passage of legislation and to stop our country from moving in directions they
saw as destructive.
How could
filibustering the war spending bill stop the war?
The Constitution says that the President can't spend anymoney without the approval of both houses
of Congress.A filibuster could prevent
the Senate from passing a bill funding the war in Iraq
-- which would then make it illegal for the President to spend any new money to
continue the war.
Where would the money
come from to bring our troops home if spending on the war were blocked?
The money appropriated last year for the war in Iraq
has not yet been completely spent. The President could use that money and other
existing money in the Pentagon budget to fully fund the swift and safe return
of our troops from Iraq.If additional funds were needed for the
withdrawal, Congress could pass a specific spending bill with that limited purpose.
Why focus on Senator
Clinton and Senator Obama?
Senator Clinton and Senator Obama have both repeatedly said that
they want the war to end and want troop withdrawals to begin immediately. They
are saying that we should elect them so they can get us out of Iraq.
But the reality is they could do something today to bring
the war to an end. As prominent figures in the Senate and in their party,
either of them could be in a strong position to get 40 Senators to back them in
a filibuster.
As Presidential candidates, they both know they need the
votes of our country's anti-Iraq-war majority to win their party's nomination
and the presidency, so they are more vulnerable to our pressure than most
Senators.
That said, we are calling on every Senator to
filibuster any bill that funds the continuation of the war in Iraq instead of
funding the swift and safe return of our troops and the care they need when
they get home -- both those Senators who have already spoken out against the
war and those Senators who have publicly supported the war but may have private
doubts and concerns about the course it has taken.
Why not just pass an
appropriations bill now that would only fund the return of our troops?
Great idea, but that does not appear to be what
Congressional leaders in the House who are writing the war spending bill are
doing. Despite being voted into office with a mandate to end the war in Iraq,
Congressional leaders lack the political courage to take the action that is needed.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. John Murtha, who chairs
the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, were once vocal
opponents of the war in Iraq -- but recent press reports indicate that they are
prepared to give the President more money than he is asking for, funding the
war in Iraq for all of 2008 and 6 months into 2009 (the beginning of the next
President's term) in order to avoid a controversial debate about war funding
too close to the November election.We
know that another year of war will mean the deaths of hundreds of U.S.
troops, and tens of thousands of Iraqi children, women, and men. We know that
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is affecting more and more service members and
that suicide rates among those who have served in combat are skyrocketing. We
know that our loved ones and their families are suffering each and every day
that this war is allowed to continue.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey and others in the Out of Iraq Congress
have put forward a bill that would require the return of our troops from Iraq
over the next year. But without support from the Congressional leadership they
are unlikely to be able to get the bill to pass in the House. And they would
then need a 2/3 majority vote in both
the House and the Senate to override a certain Presidential veto.
A Senate filibuster – requiring the support of only 41
Senators -- would immediately change the political equation in Washington.