"SHARED SACRIFICE" ACT

The war in Iraq is the most pressing problem our nation faces today, and the failure of Congress to address resolution of this war has left its members derelict in their duty. From the rush to war until now, politicians have shown a far greater concern for their political careers than they have for the lives of our people. Afraid of being seen as not tough enough in the war on terror, many Democrats never pushed to force a debate about surrendering authorization to President Bush for the use of force, or about the dramatic shift a preemptive war represents in U.S. foreign policy. Republicans meanwhile, as the war dragged on, overlooked their responsibilities of Congressional oversight, leaving our troops under-funded and under-protected in battle, while more than funding their war-profiteering friends in business. Profits by these companies like Halliburton and its subsidiaries were even made directly at the expense of our soldiers, as with their failure to purify water supplies for the troops. Elected to this 110th Congress, in large part, to end this war and corruption, Democrats are now losing the opportunity the American people afforded them, and the result is more lost lives.

We must show the gratitude of our nation in deeds, not words. I propose what I will for now call the Shared Sacrifice Act of 2007 which would establish a separate, pro-rated annual income tax for military expenditures during all times of declared war, and set out strict standards in bidding for military contracts. It would progressively add percentage points to the income tax on all non-military, non-combat veteran households, which would ensure that whatever our efforts, current or future, there is a shared sacrifice among the American people. The tax would be temporary and independent of the payment of current income taxes. For as long as a war is waged, the tax would be in effect. At yearly increments, the Congress would be required to report on its oversight of the war, and then vote on whether to continue the authorization for the use of force. If continuation is approved, the revenue raised would provide for the safety of our troops with the equipment and logistical support they need on their mission, and for greater security to their families here at home.

The effects of the legislation could be profound and far-reaching. I believe this bill will provide the impetus for a change in course for the war in Iraq, while still maintaining the status of our military as voluntary and highly professional. It would mean that whatever budget policies of the day, a domestic agenda of education, health care and the like would not be held hostage to prohibitive war costs. It would mean a return of constitutional authority to the Congress, of extensive debate about the justification and the justness for war, and it would mean that our leaders must make a better case, build more support, and heed the will of the American people, in the lead-up to any future war. It would mean that although the burden of war continues to be borne by those who fight in it, their safety in battle is held to be our true priority, their families' security to be our solemn obligation, and there will be a shared sacrifice among all citizens of this nation to meet this challenge.

For when America asked its leaders what we can do for our country, the President said nothing, except to shop, shop, and shop. Last year, the American people spoke and said that the bloodshed must stop, and they are not buying this government's lies any longer. We want our soldiers home and home safely. On this, we cannot compromise. We may disagree about how best to do it, but I urge members of Congress and of the press to give this proposal their careful consideration as a non-partisan idea which harmonizes our desire to provide in Iraq for our troops' safety, to safely bring them home, and to see to it that they and future troops are never used so wantonly in war, and without the American people agreeing to share in their sacrifice.