Arizona Daily Star  04.24.2009

Editorial

A bill co-sponsored by U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords is a good start toward breaking the connection between lawmakers’ budget requests and companies that make campaign donations to politicians.

Giffords, a Democrat, is sponsoring the bill with Rep. Paul Hodes, D-N.H. The bill would prohibit donations to a lawmaker from lobbyists or top executives in companies that donated to that individual lawmaker in the two years leading up to a politician’s re-election.

The bill doesn’t outright ban members of Congress from sponsoring earmarks – requests for money for specific projects that are put into the federal budget and not considered individually – that would benefit companies that are their donors. The time-limit approach of Giffords’ bill, while not perfect, will build in delays between the donations and earmark requests.

Lawmakers routinely deny any connection between campaign donations and budget requests or bills sponsored, but even the hint of a connection undercuts our democratic system.

This bill, the Clean Law for Earmark Accountability Reform Act, or the CLEAR Act, covers any “entity” that makes donations and requests earmarks.

Railing against earmarks is almost a franchise for Arizona politicians. Sen. John McCain has made earmark reform a centerpiece of his political persona. U.S. Rep. Jeff Flake, a Republican from the Phoenix area, has made a mission of fighting earmarks.

Giffords joins that effort. She has followed the policy outlined in her bill since coming to Congress in January 2007 and has pledged, according to a story by the Star’s Daniel Scarpinato, not to make earmark requests that would benefit private companies. “Private companies don’t have that level of transparency that public organizations like the University of Arizona or nonprofits have,” Giffords said.

One shortcoming of the bill is that it doesn’t address donations and requests from political action committees, or PACs.

That loophole must be closed because federal election law allows individuals to donate up to $2,400 to a candidate, but PACs can collect donations of up to $5,000 and make contributions of up to $10,000 to a candidate.

Giffords’ bill should become law. It’s a small step in a much broader effort to resolve a problem that has continued to dog our political process. Mixing earmarks and political donations erodes the public’s confidence that lawmakers act in their constituents’ best interest, not at the bidding of monied corporations or donors.

Arizona Daily Star, 2-12-2009

by U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords

SPECIAL TO THE ARIZONA DAILY STAR

Last week I returned from my third visit to Iraq. Each time I have been to the front lines, the conditions have improved due to the tremendous work of our U.S. armed forces. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, it is an honor to witness the dedication and extraordinary skills of our men and women in uniform.

Last week I returned from my third visit to Iraq. Each time I have been to the front lines, the conditions have improved due to the tremendous work of our U.S. armed forces. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, it is an honor to witness the dedication and extraordinary skills of our men and women in uniform.

While I have been critical of the Bush administration’s decision to go into Iraq and its many strategic mistakes in managing our efforts there, I have always been certain that our troops are the most professional and formidable in the world.

Military experts, some right here in Southern Arizona, have long maintained that our armed forces were being stretched too thin – threatening our nation’s overall readiness. This is why I opposed the surge when it was proposed in early 2007.

As a policy decision, it failed to require the Iraqi government to take more responsibility for internal security and disregarded the growing threat in Afghanistan.

I never doubted that an additional 25,000 of the world’s finest troops would improve conditions on the ground. During my trip, I saw the results. The brilliant counterinsurgency initiatives led by Gen. David Petraeus also helped reduce violence.

Iraqis, tired of fighting and bloodshed, have stepped forward. Iraqi security forces are more capable of keeping the peace, especially since Jan. 1 when the Status of Forces Agreement went into effect. Their government is reforming de-Baathification regulations and creating oil-sharing laws. Iraqis managed provincial elections this month, reporting a 52 percent turnout and virtually no violence. Hopefully the outcome will be accepted by all factions and internal rivalries between Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds will be increasingly replaced by a stronger democratic process.

Like most Americans, I celebrate the success of our military operations and recognize that the additional combat units were critical to creating the current calm.

These are not surprises. Our soldiers, Marines, airmen and sailors, despite extended tours, have always accomplished their missions.

Early on, our military toppled a ruthless dictator and won the fight for Baghdad even though the Bush administration failed to plan for winning the peace. We saw the country slip into civil unrest as centuries-old ethnic, religious and tribal rivalries resurfaced, each faction seeking to fill the vacuum of power left by the fall of the regime.

The decision to go to war in Iraq will probably be remembered as one of the worst foreign-policy blunders in our history. Defining success and judging the cause and effect of the Bush administration’s policies, including the surge, cannot be reduced to a simplistic snapshot. Remnants of civil strife and destruction linger and will for decades to come. Recent months of increased tranquility don’t erase six years of chaos and violence, sparked by a mismanaged war that fostered Islamic extremism.

Fortunately, the situation in Iraq is increasingly secure as we prepare to deploy out of that theater and lay the groundwork for success in another. Stabilizing Afghanistan is our long-overdue priority.

We must engage international partners in confronting the far more difficult challenges in this fractured and complex nation, where malicious factions such as the Taliban, al-Qaida and other terrorist groups present grave threats.

My support for our men and women in uniform remains steadfast as they adapt their effective military tactics used in Iraq to expanded operations in Afghanistan. It is critical that we work with the Afghan people to defeat shared enemies and violent extremists.

Our troops will contribute honorably to this effort and continue serving our nation with distinction.