In his own words:

And we can, we must have, a different approach, one that especially places responsibility for success where it rightfully lies, and I have heard my colleagues tonight speak about that, with the Iraqi people. I propose an amendment to the supplemental appropriations bill that will just do that, require the Iraqis to step forward, to stand up, to stop the talking, and to begin to act.
– John McHugh, February 13, 2007 before the House during H. Con. Res 63 debate.

Today’s vote on the supplemental appropriations bill was one of the most disturbing votes that our congressman has cast in his tenure as our representative. It is not a surprise that he once again voted to continue this war and support the President – he’s consistent – but rather he voted against what he publicly told us he stood for on the floor of the house. What is most disturbing is that he voted against the tenets of the very bill, HR 775, that he introduced on January 31, 2007 and called the Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq.

The very actions that he called for in his bill were each addressed in today’s supplemental appropriation. See here for a line by line comparison of his bill HR 775 and today’s bill. You will find that every single item of concern to Mr. McHugh was addressed in today’s bill – and still he votes against it.

The legitimate question is, why would he introduce a bill and then vote against it and at the same time leave our farmers in the dirt? He must have been honored, if not flattered, that the opposition party would take his ideas and incorporate them into the Supplemental today.

Who got to him? What got to him? Certainly not his constituents. The vast majority of the people in the North Country want out of the war. I’m not given to personal invective, but it was a cowardly act and it was a dishonest act. He told us one thing and did another. We’ve seen this before, but usually it’s a bit more subtle.

But his actions are consistent. Having it both ways, saying one thing and doing another. To those of us who are judged by our results and by what we do, it is offensive. Considering what he said to us in the well of the House in February and considering that he actually introduced a bill – which for him is a rare occurrence – I almost had hopes that he would do the right thing.

He can’t actually believe that the Republican party is going to come roaring back in the next election and he will get a plum committee chairmanship; hence his unflinching loyalty to the President. Power shift cycles don’t go like that. It will be at least another ten years before the Republican Party has a realistic chance at gaining control of the House. He will be in the minority for his remaining time in congress.

Could it be, and I only put it on the table for discussion, that his unfailing support of the war is to maintain Fort Drum’s size and his political base in Jefferson County. Fort Drum’s expansion has fueled an economic frenzy here in Watertown. One only has to go down to the western end of Arsenal Street and see the boom in building and the myriad of new restaurants and businesses that are opening.

It’s actually too horrific to contemplate, trading – not guns for butter – but guns for blood.

The war in Iraq is not doing us any good. We will all do better economically not having to fund this war at what most now estimate is going to cost two trillion dollars. We could use that money for so much more – maybe even help our farmers (not to mention healthcare for every single American).