In the wake of the President's attempt to classify the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization, I contacted my federal representatives to register my outrage. This looked like the prelude to another war, I said, and if the only way to stop it was to remove the President from office, that they needed to do so.
The first response I got was from Senator Kohl. It was generic pablum about how Senators couldn't start impeachment proceedings, but that he knew Kucinich was doing something in the house, and that if it ever got to the Senate he'd "keep my views in mind". No mention whatsoever of Iran, but you have to understand how the response process works - an intern gets your letter, matches it up against a preset list of things a constituent might say, and sends out the appropriate form response. Since my letter addressed two issues, said intern just picked one. Yeah, it's lame... welcome to Washington.
Senator Feingold's response, printed in full below the fold, was more disturbing.
Thank you for contacting me about Iran. I appreciate hearing from
you about this critically important issue.
Iran poses a serious threat to our national security and to the
security of the Middle East and the world. Successive U.S.
administrations have viewed Iran as a threat to both the U.S. and
our allies, particularly because of Iran's support for terrorist
organizations and Iran's history of noncompliance with global
nuclear nonproliferation standards. I am deeply concerned about
Iran's efforts to advance its nuclear program. I am also concerned
about the ineffective policy being pursued by the Administration
toward Iran, and the fact that the Administration is rejecting
outright the notion of engaging directly with Iran's leadership.
Currently, U.S. sanctions ban or strictly limit U.S. trade, aid, and
investment in Iran and prohibit selling technology or arms that
could be used by Iran to intimidate its neighbors in the region.
Sanctions also penalize foreign firms that invest in Iran's energy
sector. I have supported these sanctions, and have worked to make
them even stricter. On February 8, 2007, I introduced S. 527, the
Iran, North Korea, and Syria Nonproliferation Enforcement Act of
2007, which would require sanctions on proliferators, extend
sanctions to their parent companies, and increase the types of
sanctions that apply to proliferators. By adopting this legislation,
we would be sending a clear message to would-be proliferators that
choosing to assist Iran in developing nuclear capabilities will mean
they cannot conduct business with the United States. I hope the
full Senate will consider this legislation during the 110th Congress.
I also cosponsored a resolution introduced on January 27, 2006 by
Senator Bill Frist (R-TN) that condemned Iran for violating its
international nuclear nonproliferation obligations and supported
efforts to report Iran to the United Nations Security Council. I was
pleased that on January 27, 2006, the Senate passed this resolution
by unanimous consent.
I am also concerned about Iran's abysmal human rights record.
For many years, religious minorities in Iran have faced
discrimination and repression. The U.S. and United Nations
human rights reports cite Iran for abuses such as summary
executions, disappearances, torture, and arbitrary arrest and
detention. Iran has also been consistently criticized for
suppression of political dissidents and violations of the rights of
women.
As a member of the Senate Committees on Foreign Relations and
Intelligence, I will continue to monitor developments in Iran
closely. Thanks again for contacting me. I encourage you to do so
in the future regarding this or any other issue of importance to you.
Sincerely,
Russell D. Feingold
United States Senator
So how do I read this? Because it sure doesn't sound like he's in the front ranks of opposition. In fact, if I had to guess who wrote this, I'd assume a Republican Hawk.
Given that this is Senator Feingold, I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. He's doesn't explicitly endorse military action. And besides, these letters don't get updated very often, and it's not like anything he's saying about Iran's abysmal human rights record is incorrect. But with the possibility of another war in the Gulf becoming imminently more probable, it does raise the question of whether this is even on his radar screen, and if it is, where he intends to stand during whatever days we have left. Usually, a Senator or Representative will have at least two form responses ready regarding contentious issues - the one for constituents who support whatever it is, and the one for constituents who oppose. It would appear that Sen. Feingold just has one, marked "Iran: Anti".
Am I off base here? I think other inquiring minds might like to know.