Apples, Oranges, and Iraq

Two area Democratic congressmen, Patrick Murphy (D-08) and Joe Sestak (D-07) have sponsored or co-sponsored legislation to bring troops home from Iraq. Just for lack of anything else to do on a snowy evening, let’s take a look at the bills and see where they are alike and how they differ. Is it apples and oranges, or Red Delicious vs. Golden? You decide.

Both begin with praise for the troops, both set deadlines for American troops leaving Iraq, though one is a hard and fast deadline, with exceptions on which personnel might remain; the other sets reasons why troops might remain generally and benchmarks for the Iraqis to meet to keep American troops there. I have included links to the bill information (including text of the bills) in Thomas (links off the bill number), a list of newspaper articles for more information, and links to the remarks of both Murphy and Sestak on the House floor regarding Iraq. Because I’m sure all of you will want to look more fully into both of these pieces of suggested legislation.

Murphy’s bill, HR 787, was formally introduced by Rep. Mike Thompson with Murphy as the primary co-sponsor. A companion bill was introduced in the Senate by Sen. Barack Obama. The House bill currently has 21 co-sponsors, including Pennsylvanians Bob Brady, Chris Carney, and Paul Kanjorski. It has been referred to three committees: Armed Services, Foreign Relations and Rules. It is called the Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007, with this summary: To state United States policy for Iraq, and for other purposes.

The introduction goes into a lot of detail, citing comments by the President and others who have been policymakers on the war. Redeployment is to begin May 1, 2007 and be completed by March 31, 2008. The redeployment is to be planned by military personnel, possibly in consultation with the Iraqi government. There are 13 conditions for halting troop removal, many pertaining to actions by the Iraqis. The President is to report to Congress every 90 days on progress. Troops may be left in Iraq for these purposes: to protect United States personnel and facilities in Iraq, to conduct targeted counter-terrorism operations, to provide training for Iraqi security forces, and to conduct the routine functions of the Office of Defense Attache. There are also sections in the bill relating to troop size, and political and economic assistance to Iraq. It is a thoughtful piece of legislation, clearly a lot of planning and consideration went into it.

For more information

Murphy Obama lay out Iraq plan, the Intelligencer 2/07/07 by Brian Scheid

Murphy Obama team on troop plan, Inquirer 2/07/07 Steve Goldstein

Murphy co-sponsors bill to force pullout from Iraq, Allentown Morning Call 2/07/07 by Josh Drobnyk

Murphy’s remarks on the House floor


Sestak is the sponsor of HR 960, two other representatives (Carol Shea-Porter of NJ and Steve Cohen of TN) are primary co-sponsors. The only other co-sponsor is Pennsylvania's Bob Brady. It has been referred to Armed Services and Foreign Relations.

The bill summary is this: To enhance the national security interests of the United States both at home and abroad by setting a deliberate timetable for the redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq by December 31, 2007, and for other purposes.

This bill calls for all US troops to be redeployed (removed from) Iraq by Dec. 31, 2007 except: special operations forces, military liaison teams, air support, counter-terrorism operations, security for United States diplomatic missions in Iraq, and the defense attaché.

A few articles mention Sestak’s bill in passing but I’ve only seen one that goes into anything close to depth.

Sestak’s bill setting date for troop withdrawal ignites furor 2/09/07 by William Bender, Delcotimes.com

Sestak’s remarks on the House floor


I will check back from time to time and see what happens with these bills.