Freshmen 42: A First Split on the Iraq War

For the first time since entering Congress on Jan. 3, the House's freshmen Democrats split into different camps last week on a key Iraq war vote.

Until last week, the "Freshmen 42" had voted in lock step with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on every major Iraq vote this year, repeatedly supporting a timeline for withdrawing U.S. troops sometime next year.

Affectionately known as the "majority makers" by Democratic leaders, the freshmen split last week on a proposal offered by Rep. James McGovern (D-Mass.) that called for redeploying troops from Iraq within 90 days and mandated complete withdrawal within 180 days -- the most aggressive anti-war vote of the year so far.

The amendment was generally considered a peace offering by Pelosi to her left flank within the caucus, allowing the most anti-war liberals to at least vote for a pull-out position in exchange for backing the leadership's latest version of a supplemental war spending bill, which would hold back some Iraq funds until President Bush issued a status report to Congress.

Yet all sides were stunned to see 171 "yea" votes on the rapid withdrawal plan, a total that included votes by two Republicans (Reps. Ron Paul of Texas and John Duncan of Tennessee).

Among the freshmen bloc, 15 Democrats opposed the nearly immediate withdrawal from Iraq offered by McGovern. As the chart below shows, that group represents some of the reddest districts in Democratic hands, such as those held by Christopher P. Carney (Pa.) and Health Shuler (N.C.). Carney and Shuler ousted GOP incumbents last year with 53 and 54 percent of the vote, respectively; both their districts were won handily by President Bush in 2004 (60 percent of the vote in Carney's district, 57 Shuler's).

The two lawmakers are near the top of the target list for Republicans heading into 2008, but that hadn't stopped them from casting anti-war votes earlier this year. They both voted with Pelosi in February on the non-binding resolution opposing the president's planned Iraq troop surge into Iraq, and they both supported previous versions of the Iraq spending bill that included less radical timelines for withdrawing U.S. troops. After opposing the McGovern amendment, Carney and Shuler supported final passage last Thursday of the new supplemental spending bill.

Of the freshmen supporting McGovern's measure, 11 sit on the official target list of the National Republican Congressional Committee. Those 11 generally hail from safer districts than the 15 who voted against McGovern, but a trio is worth noting.

Either courageous in their anti-war position or politically naive, Reps. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), John Hall (N.Y.) and Steve Kagen (Wisc.) voted for the McGovern amendment. They come from the most pro-Bush districts, in terms of the 2004 vote, of the 11 targeted freshmen Democrats who supported McGovern.

Bush took 54 percent in the two Empire State districts and a whopping 55 percent in Kagen's Green Bay-anchored district.

The charts below show the breakdown of 1) the freshmen Democrats who opposed the McGovern amendment compared with their 2006 vote and Bush's 2004 vote in their district; and 2) the 11 freshmen who voted for McGovern's measure and are on the Republican target list.

FRESHMAN DEMOCRATS WHO OPPOSED THE McGOVERN AMENDMENT:

                              2006 %          Bush '04%
* Jason Altmire (Pa.)          52                54
* Nancy E. Boyda (Kansas)      51                59
* Christopher P. Carney (Pa.)  53                60
* Joe Donnelly (Ind.)          54                56
* Brad Ellsworth (Ind.)        61                62
* Gabrielle Giffords (Ariz.)   54                53
* Baron Hill (Ind.)            50                59
* Nick Lampson (Texas)         52                64
* Tim Mahoney (Fla.)           50                54	
* Jerry McNerney (Calif.)      53                54
* Harry E. Mitchell (Ariz.)    50                54
* Ciro Rodriguez (Texas)       54                57
* Heath Shuler (N.C.)          54                57
* Zachary T. Space (Ohio)      62                57
* Charles A. Wilson (Ohio)     62                51

TARGETED FRESHMEN DEMOCRATS WHO SUPPORTED McGOVERN:

                              2006 %          Bush '04 %
* Michael Arcuri (N.Y.)        54                53
* Joe Courtney (Conn.)         50                44
* Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.)    53                54
* John Hall (N.Y.)             51                54
* Steve Kagen (Wisc.)          51                55
* Ron Klein (Fla.)             51                48
* Dave Loebsack (Iowa)         51                44
* Patrick Murphy (Penn.)       50                48
* Carol Shea-Porter (N.H.)     51                51
* Tim Walz (Minn.)             53                51
* John Yarmuth (Ky.)           51                49

By Paul Kane |  May 15, 2007; 5:00 AM ET House , Iraq
Previous: Senate GOP: Light at the End of the Iraq Tunnel? | Next: Sen. Graham: Still Not Happy With Gonzales

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Have no fear Heath

Posted by: mikelemm | May 15, 2007 8:10 AM

Here Here!

This is a not a loss for uber-liberal Democrats, it simply shows that the party's moderate wing is growing stronger.

Posted by: William | May 15, 2007 12:35 PM

The Bush vote in 2004 is irrelevant now. Freshmen need have no fear to end Iraq war. I voted for Bush in 2004 but now can not stand him and would not vote for any republicans in 2008 for the first time since 1964. Republicans in Congress have gone insane by voting with the Moronic decider on Iraq questions, voting to disallow drug imports from foreign nations and generally being stubborn and unhelpful to the American nation. They seem to have taken a pill from the White House that makes them act stupid. The Moron does know a lot about drugs, do not forget.

Posted by: mascmen7 | May 15, 2007 1:12 PM

Since I'm from New Hampshire, which was once the reddest of Red States but turned totally Blue in the 2006 Thumping, I'm simply amazed that the new blue New Hampshire is hardly even going to be a target for Republicans in 2008.

Of course, I don't think Porter will have anyone leaving her side over Iraq since that's why she was elected.
And John Sununu in the Senate is TOAST in NH with his continued rubberstamping of the Commander Guy.
This should all speak volumes about the direction of our country, and just how damaged the Republican brand name is.

Posted by: Jan | May 15, 2007 1:31 PM

Paul, So what? Get real. What Bush did in 2004 is irrelevant. If Bush is still in office in 16 months and the troops are in the same untenable position then as now, there will not be a red districts left in the country. Under those circumstance if a Congressional district stays red in 08 it will be because their under funded Republican representatives will be chirping louder for an Iraq withdrawal than their Democrat opponents.

Posted by: Redman | May 15, 2007 1:43 PM

I feel that Bush/Cheney et al must be held accountable for the Iraq lies and resultant fiasco. War crimes and criminal charges fit the bill FOR IMPEACHMENT - certainly better than why Bill Clinton was impeached!! Get the troops home ASAP!!!

Posted by: Wanda Hawkins | May 15, 2007 1:59 PM

The Australian Howard government reputedly a good friend of the Bush administration is doing badly in the polls. I suspect it is in part for the similar reasons as reported amongst concerned US citizens due to the Iraqui fiasco. However, the Howard government is now hoodwinking the workers over pay and conditions of employment, scaring the hell out of them. It seems the conservatives are slowly committing suicide.

Posted by: Ralf Kluin | May 15, 2007 3:02 PM

If the original principle of why we are fighting this war is as important as Bush claims, after $340 billion already spent, the further $100+ billion to be spent should be redirected toward plans to fight poverty and develop the country to prevent another Afghanistan. It would be irresponsible to just leave Iraq when we have created something that needs to be remedied. Our leaders need to be responsible at this point in decision making. According to the Borgen Project, just $19 billion annually can end starvation and $15 billion provides water and sanitation all over the world. If ending terror is the goal, the Millennium Development Goals to end poverty is the way to to go for our leaders.

Posted by: elle c | May 15, 2007 8:28 PM

You don't have to leave Iraq, just withdraw your troops!

Posted by: Bill MacLeod | May 15, 2007 9:24 PM

Nice to see people waking up for a change and realizing that between all those lobbyist contributions, some people in Congress still have a spine!

If you follow the Congressional hearings it's clear that there's a lot going on in Iraq that is against the principles and morals of this nation, wartime or no, and the mainstream media has abdicated its responsibility to inform the public. TROOPS. HOME. NOW.

Oh yeah, it'll be a real disaster when the Iraqis depose the last of our puppet regime and ramp up oil production to rebuild their economy, and crash the price of oil. A REAL DISASTER. Bring it on!

Posted by: toddpw | May 16, 2007 4:30 AM

The Shrub/Shotgun Cheney can't do much except hurt the freshmen in swing districts. Having said that, is 2006 was definitely about the war and corruption, 2008 will be less well defined.

Yes, the "war" will remain a pivotal issue, but some of its emotion was drained in 2006, so it will lose a bit of its critical mass. Unless the news becomes progressively worse, the point of the tack will dull a bit.

In the next several months, we need to see a Congress achieving some important legislation, so it will be easy to contrast it with the previous Republican-controlled Congress. I think that's the only way some of these "endangered" Congresspeople can defend their seats in 2008.

Posted by: pacman | May 16, 2007 8:42 AM

It's true that not only democrats are fed up with this war. Republicans are increasingly recognizing that we will not win in Iraq and throwing funds and troops at the problem hasn't and most likely won't resolve the situation. We either need to change our strategy, or get out. While involved in this war other causes have been overlooked, such as meeting the Millenium Goals which were set to end world hunger. According to the Borgen Project 600 million people could be rescued from severe poverty with $19 billion annually. $340 billion have gone towards this war; can't we spare a little percentage of that for a cause which will return results?

Posted by: sl | May 16, 2007 11:29 AM

Upstate NY is a different landscape than in 2004. Voters finally became sick of Pataki, they have seen the Republican leadership for what it is (focused on big corporate wealth, not on real conservative values) and have started to recognize that on economic advancement issues, Democrats are more in line with what they want and need. Gillibrand's district has been red, definitely, but there is a lot of disgust right now the GOP and the failed war; same for Arcuri and Hall's districts. I think these members were listening to their voters.

Posted by: Arlington_Mike | May 17, 2007 3:10 PM

What Capital Hill needs is an Enema!

Posted by: Jay Bailey | May 18, 2007 11:22 PM

I have been staggered continually at how citizens have ignored the unlawful actions of this administration and have come up with justifications which come from Mars or Jupiter for their bloody electoral work.
Anyone with any wit or understanding could not have missed all the early signs in 2001 and certainly 2002. We, not just Bush, initiated two or more wars of discretion based solidly on lies. These lies are felonies. The law says those who know of a felony, and felon(s) must report such felonies to a magistrate or judge immediately or be prosecuted for the same felonies. What we have is a total breakdown in the law. There is no faith. The statistics, for which we pay, coming from the Government are Republican Lies. At what point will the people say, enough, and help right this ship. We have lapsed into the most desperate shape I have ever seen or read about--and the pending consequences appear disasterous. So, Bush will escape and be worshipped by a small group of Koolaid drinkers and radical sects while we get stuck with the clean up bill and/or a dictatorship. The time for Dems and Republicans of good will (should there be any left anywhere) to stand up and be counted without worry about their jobs is way long past. Living in fear is dumb, but our so called leaders are there.

Posted by: wafranklin | May 26, 2007 10:10 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2008 The Washington Post Company