Since March 2005, New Nebraska Network has been the state's premier source of progressive online political commentary and community-building.
Please support our efforts by becoming engaged, spreading the word, and contributing what you can towards our continued growth as a voice for change in Nebraska politics.
In February, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee ran an ad reminding 2nd Congressional District voters that Rep. Lee Terry had supported the massive bail-out of Wall Street but was abandoning America's middle-class. After hitting him for not "Putting Families First", the DCCC is now back in Nebraska in time for Independence Day to ask why Lee Terry has abandoned his commitment to America's troops just because there's a new president in the White House.
Terry is one of seven Republican Congressmen targeted in this campaign. At question is his June 16th vote against a Supplemental Appropriations bill to fund our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course, this bill was largely decided on party lines and Republican Congressmen Jeff Fortenberry and Adrian Smith both joined Terry in opposition. The difference is that Terry represents a district that is home to a lot of military families who should rightfully expect more than these sorts of political games from their Congressional representative.
Needless to say, Terry also represents a very competitive district that is being targeted heavily by Democrats in 2010. It certainly can't hurt that State Sen. Tom White, the top Democratic recruit to hopefully challenge Terry, has built a very strong record standing up for Nebraska's men and women in uniform in just three years in the Legislature. You can already see a powerful message taking shape that veterans and their families could count on Tom White's support no matter who's in the White House, which is more than they can expect from Lee Terry.
It's worth noting that Republicans in the House objected to the supplemental because of its including a provision for an expanded line of credit to the International Monetary Fund. Although these loaded votes were a common practice when Republicans controlled Congress, it's not fair to use them as they once did to question Terry's patriotism. However, in this instance, the funding for our troops was actually put in jeopardy by a push encouraging more liberal members of Congress who oppose the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to join the Republicans in their opposition. That made for a closer vote in which Terry's vote took on added consequence.
Most importantly, this ad also raises a legitimate question about Terry's priorities, as illustrated by Republican Senator Mike Johanns' coming to a different conclusion and voting in support of the same measure. Johanns stated in a press release:
Senator Mike Johanns today voted to extend funding for American service members. The Supplemental Appropriations bill provides $105.9 billion, mostly for U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan through September of this year. Although he opposes funding for the International Monetary Fund included in the bill, Senator Johanns believes that funding for our troops is too important to be held up.
"Our servicemen and women put their lives on the line every day to defend our country," Johanns said. "Adequate funding is critical for them to carry out their mission and keep us safe. The defense of our country and our values will always be one of my top priorities."
Johanns believed that the funding for our troops was too important to be held up. Lee Terry believed otherwise and helped put that funding in jeopardy. Let the voters of the 2nd Congressional District take from that what they will as we look forward to the 2010 election.
