Russ Feingold: “I strongly oppose the Cochran amendment, which would strike language in the bill that takes a significant step toward…”

“I strongly oppose the Cochran amendment, which would strike language in the bill that takes a significant step toward ending our involvement in the war in Iraq. The language I am referring to won the support of 48 Senators just a few weeks ago. I voted for it then and will vote to retain it today. While it does not go as far or as fast as I would like, it would effectively end the President's misguided policies in Iraq by terminating, within 120 days, the current open-ended military mission in Iraq. At that point, U.S. troops could remain in Iraq for three specified, narrow purposes. The remainder of our troops would be redeployed. This provision is binding and it would bring to an end our current involvement in perhaps the greatest foreign policy mistake in our country's history. Some of my colleagues continue to argue that Congress should defer to the Commander in Chief when it comes to Iraq, that we should give him the opportunity to change course in Iraq, or that we should allow his escalation plan the chance to succeed. Those arguments ignore our congressional responsibilities. Congress authorized this war and it is in our power to bring it to a close. More importantly, we have not just the power but the responsibility to end a war that is draining vital national security resources in pursuit of a goal that cannot be achieved militarily. The political problems that are driving much of the insurgency and sectarian strife in Iraq are tragic and important.”