The same group of Maryland anti-war protesters who staged two February sit-ins in Sen. Barbara Mikulski’s office, expanded their efforts to the House Thursday to persuade Rep. Chris Van Hollen to vote against additional funding for the Iraq war.
“While Congress refuses to set a timetable for troop withdrawal, more Americans are sent to die,” said protester Deborah Vollmer, who challenged Van Hollen, D-Kensington, in the 2006 election.
Vollmer, along with about a dozen other protesters, gathered in Van Hollen’s tiny Capitol Hill office Thursday afternoon to read the names of deceased Maryland soldiers and Iraqi citizens, and tape their pictures to the wall.
Van Hollen’s communications officer said the group did not contact the office to schedule an appointment and due to previously scheduled meetings, the congressman could not be there.
However, in a telephone interview after the protest peacefully ended, Van Hollen said that he “welcomed them to the office and looked forward to hearing their viewpoint.”
The same group visited Mikulski’s Capitol Hill office twice last month, the last of which resulted in the arrest of four protesters after they failed to leave at the 6 p.m. closing time.
The anti-war group argues that while both representatives say they oppose the war, they continue to vote to fund it. The 2007 emergency supplemental budget beginning the appropriations process reportedly contains billions in additional funding for the Iraq war effort.
Van Hollen did not vote on going to war because he was then in the Maryland State House. Mikulski voted against it, but has maintained that she will not do anything that will cut funding for the troops in combat zones.
“Her stance is that she will not abandon the soldiers on the field or once they come home,” said Melissa Schwartz, Mikulski’s communications director.
Van Hollen said he also supports funds that take care of the troops.
“I strongly support the funds in there for Walter Reed and for ensuring both the veterans and our military get the health care that they need and are treated with dignity and respect.”
A supplemental funding bill is used when some unforeseen need comes up such as a natural disaster, said James Horney, director of Federal Fiscal Policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
“With Iraq, Bush knew we were going to need more money, he just wasn’t sure how much,” Horney said.
In 2006, the supplemental bill called for $94.5 billion to cover costs of the war. However, costs that had nothing to do with defense spending, such as Hurricane Katrina, were also included.
While the details of the current supplemental funding bill are not known, the possibility of funding for operations other than defense being included in the bill keeps Mikulski’s vote open.
For the protesters though, the issue is more black and white.
“Even if other things do come attached (to the bill) we want them to vote against it no matter what,” said former senatorial candidate and protester Kevin Zeese.
<!–
–>