The truth about Kerry’s $87 billion vote

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Lately my television set has been bombarded with ads from Republican President George W. Bush. One ad that came into my living room was a little shocking: It said John Kerry did not support the troops overseas. What this ad was referring to was Democratic Presidential Nominee John Kerry’s vote against a bill that would allocate $87 billion for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. The ad doesn’t explain why he did not vote for the legislation. We are left with the impression that Kerry voted against our troops and that he is a jerk.

Well, this is only a half-truth. Kerry did not vote for the $87 billion for a reason. Before the bill came to a vote, Sen. John Kerry and Sen. Joseph Biden had proposed an amendment to delay some of the “tax cuts for the wealthy.” This was struck down. Sen. Kerry was displaying fiscal responsibility on behalf of the country. With a soaring budget deficit, the country can’t afford to be giving money to the rich and fund two wars.

The story runs a little deeper though. Stephanie Cutter, a Kerry spokeswoman, said this about the vote in October 2003: “The nation had four months before funds were needed but Republicans were hell-bent on moving this bill through as quickly as possible, before the tough questions could be asked and the Presidents failures would be discovered.” For instance, how was the government planning to pay for the additional funding? What was Bush’s exit strategy in Iraq?

Cutter also said that the White House had threatened to veto the entire $87 billion package, if the Kerry-Biden amendment had been adopted. Kerry decided a presidential veto would be worse, because the troops needed the money. He also realized that the Republicans would back their president and not allow the bill to get through. So he did not choose to fight for this amendment. Instead, he opted to vote against the bill in protest. As informed readers know, Kerry has consistently supported our troops. What is ironic is that Kerry is painted as abandoning the troops.

Yet, if the amendment had passed to postpone Bush’s tax cuts for Bush’s friends Bush would have carried out his threat to veto the bill—for his millionaire buddies. Taking care of the top 10% seems to be a recurring theme in his presidency.

Kerry proposed a plan that was fiscally responsible, while also providing the military with the necessary funding they required. Kerry supported the troops and the rest of our country by voting against the bill. Someone who is able to stand up for what they believe in on such a grand scale is nothing less than…presidential.

http://nicholasnolan.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=6