US Senate Moves To Fully Fund Israel Aid

[Purveyor]

Source: Jerusalem Post

The US Senate included a measure to restore full funding for foreign aid to the budget it approved late Thursday, increasing chances that the pool of money including assistance for Israel wouldn't be cut.

The $3.5 trillion document passed by the Senate includes a $4 billion boost to the foreign operations appropriation, bringing it up to the $53.8b. sought by President Barack Obama.

Sen. John Kerry (D-Massachusetts), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and co-sponsor of the amendment, defended the move as important to advancing moderation in the Middle East.

"The reality is that we are just not doing enough today to invest in the vital components of both diplomacy and development," Kerry said on the Senate floor, referencing his recent trip to Israel, Egypt, Syria and other regional countries. "I saw firsthand the degree to which people we support in many ways are struggling to push back against enormous spending by Iran and other actors who seek to destabilize the region."

The US House of Representatives, however, only approved $48.5b. for international assistance in its version of the Fiscal Year 2010 budget earlier this week, so the differences will have to be addressed in conference between the two committees, negotiations of which are expected to pick up in earnest when Congress returns from its recess later in the month.

Read more: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1238562906554&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[Idealism]

1. When is Kerry up for re-election? n/t

[ProSense]

3. 2014 n/t

[karynnj]

9. He just won with 2/3rds of the vote last November

He has already said he is running in 2014. He is one of the safest Senators in the country a statesman, and someone with a far better voting record than many DU favorites of the month. (Not to mention, he is FAR better than your Senators.)

By the way, on foreign policy - he is to the left of key Obama administration officials (Obama, Biden, Clinton, Jones etc) - but has Obama's respect.

[Idealism]

15. Whoa there killer

Was just wondering why he was throwing some tripe in AIPACs food dish... I don't mind Kerry doing so, just wondering why the timing of it.

[karynnj]

24. Did you bother to read Prosense's links? Kerry's comment was not "tripe" and

Kerry's action had NOTHING to do with AIPAC. The statement was on foreign aid everywhere. The Jerusalem Post looked at it from Israel's perspective. As to the timing;

- Kerry is the chair of the SFRC which oversees foreign aid. He has spoken, in committee and out of committee, of the need not to step back from foreign aid at this tough economic time. He understands the pain here, but he also is aware - as testimony before his committee said, that only Canada is doing better than the US at this point and the danger of the financial crisis leading to MORE geopolitical chaos is great.

- In addition to his own long standing values, as an ally to President Obama he fought to keep the budget for foreign aid at the level Obama asked for. He obviously did a great job among his peers as this was agreed to "by unanimous consent" which really means that everyone knew he easily had the votes. This is actually impressive given the circumstances.

- As to the timing - he was the sponsor of the amendment and he made a statement before and after it was enacted.

[Idealism]

61. How would I read his links when he posted after me?

Tough to look into the future...

[Freddie Stubbs]

39. Kerry has always been a strong supporter of Israel

[No Elephants]

28. Yet, Obama did not appoint him to anything. Ironic, given that Kerry

was responsible for Obama's speaking at the DNC convention in 2004, which is what got Obama national notice, sold his books and probably helped him get elected.

Selfishly, I'm glad Kerry remains Senator from Massachusetts, especially since Kennedy is ill. (I live in Massachusetts.) However, I think he would have been great in almost any administration position.

[karynnj]

37. From Kerry's comments, there was very little that Obama could have given him that

would have made him give up his seat. I would assume that only Secretary of State would have interested him - and even then, only if Kerry would be able to have a very strong voice on foreign policy.

It might actually have been that Kerry's position in the Senate was too valuable for Obama, as well as Massachusetts, to lose. He will be the key person fighting for Obama's foreign policy and for any global warming treaty. It might also be that Kerry is too independent and has a very strong well developed foreign policy point of view. He will, as chair of SFRC be able to speak publicly on what he thinks has to be done. If you look at the team Obama has, Kerry is to the left of all of them. I suspect that one reason Obama seemed more to the left on foreign policy during the campaign than while in office was that Kerry was his chief surrogate - and his answers were specific where Obama was often intentionally conceptual - and Kerry was a top adviser. Some Obama answers in the debate were very very close to things Kerry said first.

I think the amount of influence in terms of deciding foreign policy that Kerry can and will have is independent of whether he is SoS or Senator. If Obama respects his ideas and agrees with them, he will be a powerful voice helping define foreign policy. If Obama disagrees, as Senator, Kerry can still advocate for his own ideas. As SoS he would be the President's top diplomat and would have to suborn his own views to Obama's.

Now if Obama and Kerry are completely in line on foreign policy, what is lost is that Kerry has the personality and skills that would make him an exceptional diplomat. Not surprising as he was raised the son of a diplomat and he has spoken often of his interest in other cultures and - even in college spoke of the need for foreign policy to be sensitive to that.

I suspect too that he had to have torn even thinking of leaving the Senate with Kennedy so ill. I was lucky enough to attend a MA rally that Kerry did on the eve of the election in Hyannis that Kennedy traditionally did, but he was too ill and already back in DC working on healthcare. It was clear that he loves being a MA Senator. I suspect that the only job that could really be better for him was the one he wanted and should have gotten in 2004. I would bet that had he become SoS, he might really have missed the rallies and meeting with people he does as a Senator. (Here's a link to excerpts of that rally - http://www.johnkerry.com/multimedia/entry/barnstable_democratic_town_committee_election_eve_rally_video/ Kerry's campaign made Kennedy signs and stapled them to Kerry signs - so people could flip them. One surprise to me was the number of people who called him "John", rather than "Senator" something I have never heard in NJ with our Senators.)

[ProSense]

2. Here is Kerry's full speech and statement

speech and statement.

The speech and bill is about funding Obama's International Affairs budget.

[Doctor_J]

4. More people losing jobs & health care every day,

but AIPAC won't see any hard times.

[DavidDvorkin]

5. Trivial compared to the DOD.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

49. And the never-mentioned debt service.

$300B a year.

[karynnj]

7. Kerry's amendment preserves the total international aid from OBAMA'S budget in the passed budget

The reason this article singles out Israel is because it is in the Jerusalem Post. Read Kerry's speech in Prosense's post. Note that in the OP: this increases Israel's chances. The budget does NOT allocate the money - it sets the overall mission and numbers. Look at Kerry's comment in the OP - he is speaking of foreign aid and money for development to facilitate moderation and diplomacy. Note - it was not speaking of Israel.

The fact of the matter is that Kerry is more even handed than most mainstream politicians. He is the only Senator to have actually gone to see the damage done in Gaza. He also questioned Israeli leaders on holding up delivery of pasta donated to Gaza - resulting in a change in policy - per the Israeli media. Watch his hearing on outreach to the Muslim world. http://foreign.senate.gov/hearings/2009/hrg090226p.html

Kerry has lead in engaging with the Arab leaders in that area of the world. Before you start with your kneejerk AIPAC nonsense you might want to actually read his comments on foreign policy - or consider that on things like voting to ban the sale of cluster bombs - he was clearly not on AIPAC's side.

[The Stranger]

57. Are you with John Kerry's office?

Re-election campaign?

(Sorry, just had to ask.)

[karynnj]

58. No - neither (Reading my post - a real Kerry staffer would have been politer and identified who they

work for.

I am, as my name suggests, a resident of NJ. I have never worked for any politician. I have been a member of the DU John Kerry group since late 2004 or early 2005, like to watch Senate hearings - even when Kerry is not on the committee. I did know some of the John Kerry 2008 campaign's internet team, who always posted with disclaimers saying who they were.

Many of us in the John Kerry DU group have met with each other and we have gone to Kerry rallies and speeches.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[New Dawn]

18. Do you seriously believe that everyone who opposes AIPAC is Anti-Semitic?

Or were you just being sarcastic? Either way, that post was flame-bait.

[karynnj]

25. What did Kerry's action in fighting, as Chair of SFRC, to keep the entire foreign aid budget at the

level President Obama wanted have to do with AIPAC? The fact is that the anti-AIPAC people jumped in and very incorrectly - without carefully reading the op, took something not specifically about Israel and made it about Israel.

[Fumesucker]

19. AIPAC speaks for all Jews?

I did not know that.

/Johnny Carson

[Mari333]

6. what bullshit. what absolute bullshit. nt

[pjt7]

8. It's criminal not to cut aid to Israel

& Egypt

WTF!

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

12. Where you born a toilet mouth...

... or do you just think it is "hip and cool" to be one?

[Mari333]

16. I am too old to be hip and cool, kid. nt

[EFerrari]

17. I agree. Absolute bullshit. n/t

[IndianaGreen]

10. Ahhh, the Israel whores in our Congress are at it again!

They bear responsibility for 9-11. Their knee jerk support for Israel has given us generations of terrorists.

[karynnj]

11. Please read this op more carefully

1) The Kerry amendment keeps the amount of TOTAL foreign aid what Obama asked for. It does not allocate money for Israel. (In addition to Prosense's links read this opening statement in a Kerry SFRC hearing on food security - http://foreign.senate.gov/testimony/2009/KerryStatement090324a.pdf or read his comments on aid needed for Lebanon - http://www.johnkerry.com/news/entry/a_crucial_time_for_saving_lebanons_fragile_democracy/ - that is what Kerry sees as the point of foreign aid. This is from his Catholic social justice framework. If he were Jewish - it would be called Tikkun Olam.)

2) This is an Israeli paper and they are reporting in an Israel centric fashion.

3) Israel did not attack us on 911 - OBL did. I didn't like it when Bush blamed Saddam either.

[ShareTheWoods]

13. Israel is to blame for 911 ???

Damn... and all this time I thought it was islamic/muslim extremists that flew those planes into our buildings.

[Fumesucker]

20. The point being though..

Where did those Muslim extremists come from and what motivated them to attack the US in the first place?

Or do you think "they hate us for our freedoms"?

The conflict in the Middle East is generating a great many people bent on violence for one reason or another. America's continuing one-sidedness in the conflict has caused some of those bent on violence to shift their aim toward us.

I know it's a very complex situation, a simplistic point of view from either or for that matter, any, position is going to miss a great deal of context.

[karynnj]

29. OBL spoke more of the fact that the US had a military base in Saudia Arabia

and he spoke of the damage done by the 12 years of sanctions on Iraq. The residue of the First Gulf war, that history will likely not see as the easy victory that is still conventional wisdom - even on some Democratic boards. That war was not for Israel - Israel was not involved but it was attacked by SCUD missiles anyway. It very likely was over oil.

Obama by selecting Mitchell as the envoy here and Kerry, who has for years interacted with Arab leaders like King Abdullah of Jordan, are two people working towards a more even handed approach.

[Fumesucker]

36. As I said, it is all very complex..

But the situation with Israel is a significant irritant to the populations of the area.

[karynnj]

38. sure but it is not the only problem - and I don't think it as big a factor

as our own actions.

[Fumesucker]

40. One of those actions being almost completely one sided support for Israel..

The "debate" in Israel policy in the US is even more restricted than it is in Israel itself.

Blowback is a real problem for us and our actions in the Middle East for at least the last sixty years have caused a lot of grief.

[cali]

41. here's the thing: Even without our onesided support,

9/11 would have happened. To not understand that is to not understand that what is happening is as much about what's happening within Islamic countries in the ME as anything else.

[Fumesucker]

46. There is no way to prove that statement either way..

For want of a nail, the shoe was lost and so forth.

Reality is catastrophically (in the mathematical sense) complex and the thrust of major events often turn on trivialities.

I'm currently reading a book about Alan Turing and the Allied codebreakers at Bletchley Park in WWII, had Turing not made some of the breakthroughs he did WWII could have turned out considerably differently.

http://www.bletchleypark.org.uk/

Edited to add URL.

[karynnj]

43. For"at least the last 60 years"??

The state of Israel started in May 1948 - slightly over 60 years ago. It was then attacked by its neighbors. I think all the US did was recognize the state - is that your problem?

The fact is that Kerry is one of the people who has been consistent in reaching out to both sides.

[Fumesucker]

45. Actually I was thinking of the overthrow of the Iranian Mossadegh government in 1954

By the CIA..

But thanks for jumping to conclusions..

[karynnj]

47. Given the post I responded to had 2 sentences on Israel,

then spoke of blow back on "middle eastern" policy - the jump was not that big. The one with the huge jump was you - with the last sentence not related to the first two. (Maybe putting a reference to Iran in the last sentence.)

[Fumesucker]

48. The last time I checked, Iran was in the Middle East..

Yes, my post was perhaps a bit scattered, but I'm not writing a doctoral dissertation but rather a fleeting post to a political website.

Sorry for the confusion.

[karynnj]

50. i did not say it wasn't - the point was you jumped on me for jumping to conclusions

when, in fact, given what you had written made that a logical interpretation - no matter what you meant.

[Fumesucker]

51. Apparently my apology was insufficient..

I'm not sure what else to say so I shall leave it here.

[karynnj]

52. Sorry - your apology was fine

[davidinalameda]

23. the Jews sold them the planes to fly into the buildings

you know the Jews control everything, right?

:sarcasm:

[Hulk]

21. It's time to "cut bait".

I'm sure there are plenty enough Jews willing to send money home to the radical right wing government in Israel to keep them hating and killing Palestinians for years to come. Let THEM fund it.

I'm tired of backing this bully rogue state in the middle of Arab world. If they can work out a peace deal during this administration...great. If not....cut bait and let them swim alone. As far as I'm concerned, they have earned what respect they get in the Middle East. Enough is enough. Do they ever listen to us with our monetary influence??...nada. Do we cover their asses and fund their killing missions...ALWAYS!! I'm damn sick and tired of it.

[cali]

34. oh for pity's sake.

The U.S. genius, makes Israel look like a piker when it comes to being a "rogue state"- at least by your apparent definition of such.

[Union Yes]

22. Blood Money. Tired of apologizing for Dems?

Peace activists that vote for Dems are like union activists that vote for Repukes.

I shot myself in the foot Nov 4th 2008 for THE LAST FUCKING TIME.

The Dems are a war party with a couple of peace activists smattered throughout. I can name Dennis, then I draw a blank and would have to think very hard to find another anti war Dem.

I'd vote for Dennis if he ran for Prez.

No more Dollarcrat$, no more warpigs.

This cat's voting third party from here on out. I'll be proud to "waste" my vote.

[harun]

26. Conyers, Ellison (to add to the list)

[ShortnFiery]

27. Amen Brother! You and I are of like mind.

Those of us Pro-Union and Anti-War Democrats continue to be marginalized with dismissals that we are too far left.

No, we're Pro-American Worker vice Welfare to Mega-Corporate Interests

& Pro-Rule of Law vice Supportive of Occupations within Sovereign Lands.

[karynnj]

32. This though is not one of those times

Read Kerry's floor speech and statement - in Prosense's post. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3816937&mesg_id=3816962

There is NOTHING in either that should upset an anti-war Democrat - in fact, you might actually agree with what he is saying.

[karynnj]

30. Read the statement in Prosense's post

(Here's the link - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3816937&mesg_id=3816962 )

This was Senator Kerry getting the Senate to keep President Obama's full budget for foreign aid for the entire world. It does not allocate money for any country.

Senator Kerry has done more for peace in his life time than Kuchinich has - in spite of his unfortunate IWR vote. Here, he fought for foreign aid - a main reason being to use it with diplomacy to help avoid war.

Only time will tell if President Obama will be able to tamp down at least some of the hostilities. But, you need to find McCain's comments in India about their right to strike back after Mumbai to know that your vote in 2008 was for peace. Obama, not president yet, was unofficially represented then by Kerry, who was overseas representing the SFRC, trying to urge calm in India and Pakistan - which both have nuclear weapons.

[No Elephants]

31. Because helping Mc-Palin this time would have been better than helping Obama-Biden? I don't

know. I am starting to think that I want to vote third party as well, but I wonder if I really will if an election is close.

Then again, I live in Massachusetts, so my Presidential vote does not matter, although my votes for other offices might.

Whether you vote Republican, Democrat, third party or stay home, you are helping either the Republican candidate or the Democratic candidate. No way around that.

And, if you normally vote Democratic, voting third party or staying home is going to help the Republican candidate. No way around that, either.

[ShortnFiery]

33. In the future, those threats will fall on deaf ears. SHOW US some legislation? n/t

[cali]

35. go for it.

the party could do with one less shallow thinker.

[bvar22]

54. You are not talking about one person....

You are attempting to marginalize a movement....
like Obama did when he flipped off the Liberal Internet at the Town Hall Meeting last week.

Don't underestimate the number of people who are very angry at this administration's Freeze Out of the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party.

[bdamomma]

42. oh crap, can't Israel take care of themselves? giving aid for what more weapons?

[karynnj]

44. Maybe reading the OP would help

1) They are speaking of keeping the entire foreign aid bill intact - the JP article even says this will increase Israel's chances for aid.

2) This is NOT for military weapons

Read Prosense's link to Kerry's Senate speech and to his statement.

[bdamomma]

56. thanks will review article again.

[Politicub]

53. Wow - that's a lot of money

Soon we'll be talking about real dollars.

[bvar22]

55. The Irony and the Insult:

Every Israeli enjoys Cradle to Grave Universal HealthCare, FREE at point of delivery.

Some of the US taxpayer money going to Israel comes from people who cannot afford Health Care for their own families.

Israle should be sending foreign aid to American families without Health Care.

[ardvark]

60. but then we'd be taking care of our own people

cant have that

[ardvark]

59. I always read how properous Israel is

so why do they always need our money?