Why did Kirk vote 'present' on war?
Last week, the U.S. House voted 149 to 141 to cut off funding for the war in Iraq.
The remarkable thing about this vote is not the slim majority that recognized the horrific cost of President Bush's war policy, but the sheer number of elected officials who ducked one of the most important issues facing our country today.
One-hundred-thirty-two Republicans voted "present" instead of casting an up-or-down vote on continued funding for the Iraq War.
Our Congressman, Mark Kirk, voted "present" on the funding bill. Kirk has long been in lock step with the Bush Administration's war policy.
I wonder if this "present" vote signifies that Kirk is reconsidering his position on war.
Perhaps Kirk is having trouble making up his mind about the needs of his constituents.
Taxpayers have paid $2.2 billion for the Iraq War to date, enough to provide over 900,000 people with one year of health care, hired almost 40,000 music and arts teachers for one year or given a full year's worth of health care to 1.5 million children.
The additional $578.1 million that President Bush has requested for the next year and a half could provide 4,192 affordable housing units or 8,886 elementary school teachers in the 10th Congressional district alone.
More than likely, Kirk is once again trying to play hide and seek from his constituents in an election year.
A "present" vote is simply deserting his responsibility to weigh in on a matter of grave national security.
Gregory Mysko
Northbrook