Darcy, Donna, Tom, Sam, Chellie, and Jared spoke live.

This is a potent organizing tool that we need to try and convince our other Democratic challengers to sign on to -- especially including Mark Warner. But I would love to see Leslie, Judy, and the rest of the challengers in VA also endorse this plan.

The thing that excites me about the plan is that it's a concrete proposal that can be used to really give voters a concrete idea of where a vote for a Democratic challenger might lead. And it allows us to begin assembling governing coalitions during the elections, instead of afterwards. It will really challenge the status quo in the majority if we can elect 30 or 40 or 50 Dems under this type of policy vision.

Create a Clean Energy Economy
Our nation's dependence on greater quantities of oil than any other nation on earth makes us uniquely vulnerable. Our economy cannot function without oil, so we depend on the oil-rich states. Iraq, as the source of a significant percentage of the world's known oil reserves, has been accordingly central to the interests of the United States.

Leaving aside right now the environmental implications of continued dependence on oil, the fact is that oil resources are getting depleted, and surging demand in China and India means that the remaining oil will be more costly and leave us even more vulnerable. A serious and sustained commitment to ending our dependence on oil entirely must therefore be a key part of our ongoing effort to promote our economic
and national security.

The effort to harvest new sources of energy is a perfect challenge for America - it requires ingenuity, knowledge and expertise. If we make the investments, alternative energy will create new industries and new technology that will provide jobs and economic growth for the foreseeable future.

Legislation to take aggressive first steps to relieve our nation of its crippling dependence on oil has been introduced in the form of the H.R. 2809: New Apollo Energy Act of 2007, which would provide an aggressive start to fixing the problem.

H.R. 2809: New Apollo Energy Act of 2007
To ensure that the United States leads the world baseline in developing and manufacturing next generation energy technologies, to grow the economy of the United States, to create new highly trained, highly skilled American jobs, to eliminate American overdependence on foreign oil, and to address the threat of global warming.

Incorporate ongoing war funding into the normal Congressional budgeting process

The budgeting process for future Iraq reconstruction needs to be overhauled. As described earlier,
bypassing normal budgeting procedures for Iraq appropriations strips the Congress of much of its
oversight ability, which is critical to its role to balance the executive. As the Iraq Study Group noted,
"(M)ost of the costs of the war show up not in the normal budget request but in requests for
emergency supplemental appropriations. This means that funding requests are drawn up outside
the normal budget process, are not offset by budgetary reductions elsewhere, and move quickly to
the White House with minimal scrutiny. Bypassing the normal review erodes budget discipline and
accountability."

For congressional oversight to be effective, appropriations should go through the normal budgetary
process, including hearings before authorizing committees.

Restore Transparency and Accountability

An important goal of the 110th Congress must be the rollback of the excessive executive authority that
the current administration has taken. These additional powers were taken at the expense of Congress,
hampering its ability to fulfill its oversight role. Transparency and accountability-to both the Congress
and the American people-were lost in the run-up to the war. Subsequent activities have further
undermined the checks between the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch, as
well as between the government and the people of this country.

Eliminate signing statements

The U.S. Constitution is very clear about the process by which legislation is passed: the House and the
Senate must each pass the legislation and it must then be signed by the President. The President has no
power to make law unilaterally. Our current president, however, has made unprecedented use of "signing
statements" in which he attempts to substantially alter the meaning of laws and their interpretation by
the courts. These signing statements are a dangerous device that undermines Congress' constitutional
powers and ability to act as a check on the executive.

As a first step in correcting this executive overreach, H.R. 3045 would prohibit the courts from using
signing statements in their deliberations about the meanings of laws.

H.R. 3045: Presidential Signing Statements Act of 2007

This legislation would prohibit any state or federal court from relying on or deferring to a presidential
signing statement as a source of authority when determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, and
provide mechanisms for Congress to clarify their intent with respect to legislation being interpreted
by the courts.

Restore the guarantee of habeas corpus

One of the most critical checks on the government's coercive power is the right of the individual to appeal
for relief from arbitrary detention to a court of law. No one can speak out freely against an executive who
has an unchecked right to detain political prisoners without oversight.
However, in the name of expediency, the Bush Administration and the Congress passed the Military
Commissions Act of 2006 which bars habeas corpus appeals from anyone the Administration declares to
be an "enemy combatant."

H.R. 1416 would restore the Constitutional right of habeas corpus and the rights guaranteed under the
Geneva Conventions to any prisoners of war taken by the U.S.

H.R. 1416: Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007

This legislation would repeal the portions of the Military Commissions Act which suspended
habeas corpus and the Geneva Conventions.

End warrantless spying on U.S. citizens

Democracy depends on dialogue between citizens unhampered by fear of those in power. The
Constitution protects such dialogue by prohibiting government surveillance without probable cause
and judicially-issued warrants. The Bush Administration, however, began intercepting electronic
communications from Americans with no warrants and has continued to do so flagrantly.

Restoring this basic check of the people on government
should begin with S.139: The Foreign
Surveillance Expedited Review Act.

S. 139 Foreign Surveillance Expedited Review Act

This legislation would provide standing for civil actions for declaratory and injunctive relief to persons
who refrain from electronic communications through fear of being subject to warrantless electronic
surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes.

These are the issues that desperately need to be addressed to bring us back to our Constitutional mooring. Really great stuff.  

Of course, the war is closely tied to our economy. If you saw the press conference today, then you saw Darcy Burner make the point that each Congressional district has, in effect, spent a billion dollars on this war. To me, that is a powerful argument to bring home the effects of this war on every American, not just on those who paid the ultimate sacrifice or have suffered devastating personal effects because of wounds, physical or psychological, or the loss of a loved one.

Anyway, the only way to end this war is to elect a Democrat as president of the United States. If John McCain is our next president, nothing will change.

But I disagree with your last statement. I think we'll elect a Democratic President, but, should that somehow fail to happen, the Congress absolutely has the power to end this war, and we must forcefully press for every person running for Congress to commit to doing so. I'd even argue it's crucial to the future of this country that the Congress pass legislation doing so, even if (when!) the President is Barack or Hillary. The Congress must pull power back from the Executive branch if we're to recover from the Age of Bush.

But the Congress has other tools at its disposal besides just the power of the purse. The Congress can retract the AUMF, or make other legislative pronouncements dealing with the authorization for this quasi-war -- the power of the purse is merely the Congress' bargaining chip. If we have more Democrats in both houses of Congress, even John McCain will not be able to continue this war if he's elected President.  

The other point is that even if Congress did vote to end the war, its going to take a long time to get 160,000+ troops and volumes of equipment out of there.  Estimates show that the Army can only process so much through its port in Kuwait, and you can only remove 1-2 combat brigades per month.  We have somewhere near 23 bridages in country.  So, a timely withdrawal would just not be possible.

My points as to how Congress might end the war were more hypothetical in nature, in the situation where there are increased Dem majorities in both Houses next year but still a Republican President. I don't expect this to happen.

But, even if there is a Democratic President, I am strongly in favor of the Congress passing legislation that brings us closer to an end to the war, and to revoking the AUMF. This legislation can and should be flexible and allow for some deviations in withdrawal logistics and diplomatic strategy, but should have a date certain for final withdrawal of all or nearly all troops (>95% in 4 years, >50% in 2 years, or some other such formulation). The plan released today seems to point in this kind of general direction.