State’s bills on Iraq not likely to influence many
DENVER - For more than a month now, a resolution calling for the end of Iraq war escalation has been about the hottest, most contentious issue at the state Capitol.
But in the halls of Congress, where the Colorado General Assembly wants to send its message, there is little interest in how Colorado legislators feel about something that isn’t their responsibility.
The war resolution, like all resolutions, mandates nothing, spends no money and carries with it no force of law. It’s merely intended to convey the Legislature’s opinion.
The U.S. House of Representatives voted three weeks ago to set a September 2008 deadline for withdrawing troops from Iraq — and several congressional spokespeople said the yet-to-be-delivered resolution from Denver will not influence how they feel.
Meanwhile, the offices of Colorado’s two senators said they continuously gather facts to consider strategy but are getting most of their information from Washington, D.C., sources.
“It’s not possible for me to measure the effectiveness because I don’t know that anyone in D.C. is paying attention to these legislative measures,” Steve Wymer, press secretary for Republican Sen. Wayne Allard, said of the Colorado resolution and others going through legislatures in other states. “The Senate hasn’t actually received any of these.”
The state’s seven U.S. representatives voted along party lines on the pullout measure. Allard has hung with most Republicans in supporting President Bush’s troop build-up in Iraq, while Democratic Sen. Ken Salazar is pushing the president to implement the Iraq Study Group’s recommendations to “develop a new way forward,” according to his office.
Officials for Democratic congressmen John Salazar of Manassa and Ed Perlmutter of Wheat Ridge said that they likely would be in synch with the sentiment of the state resolution. But neither has received any correspondence on it, and both press secretaries noted that the congressmen have cast their votes, so a resolution from Colorado can’t have much influence.
“He will always take our legislators’ views into consideration,” said Tara Trujillo, spokeswoman for Rep. Salazar. “Right at this point, he’s already voted on the issue.”
Said Leslie Oliver, spokeswoman for Perlmutter: “I know he’s been following what’s going on at the state level, but I don’t know that he’s taken any position on what the state is doing. He’s focusing on the federal level.”
State Rep. Terrance Carroll, one of the House sponsors of the resolution, acknowledged it’s unlikely the congressional delegation would be holding its collective breath before making decisions. But because the war is the biggest issue in the country, he thought the Legislature should let its thoughts be known to Congress and the president.
“The purpose is just to send a message,” said Carroll, D-Denver. “I don’t suspect we’ll get
Congresswoman (Marilyn) Musgrave or Senator Allard to change their vote.”
Still, the resolution and the war remain a hot topic in Denver.
After the House toned down the Senate version of the resolution last week to state that the opposition is to the overall escalation of the war rather than the specific escalation of troops, Senate sponsor Ron Tupa, D-Boulder, called the statement unrecognizable and said he couldn’t back it. The amended resolution has languished on the Senate calendar for a week, and Carroll said he hasn’t spoken with Tupa about it.
In the meantime, a Senate committee unanimously approved an alternate resolution last week by Republican Sen. Mike Kopp that recognizes troops’ accomplishments and states a commitment to a “successful and lasting conclusion of the mission” in Iraq.
Also, the Senate Appropriations Committee backed a bill by Kopp, R-Littleton, allowing for a memorial to the War on Terrorism to be erected on Capitol grounds with private funds.
