The Democratic Party Platform expresses
a commitment to "end forever wars." But Congress is currently pushing
to keep the war on Afghanistan going and even to keep troops in Germany
and Korea. Military funding is regularly up for a vote. Ending the war
on Yemen will be on the agenda in the coming months, as will relations
with Cuba, Iran, and North Korea. So will disarmament treaties with
Russia. So will sanctions against the International Criminal Court. So
will weapons sales to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. What
positions Congress members can be expected to take and be lobbied to
take would be much clearer if they were asked to express any opinions as
part of their election campaigns.
What Can Be Done
RootsAction has created an online action page for emailing your Congress member and asking them to take prominent public positions on key questions of foreign policy and spending priorities, on both their Congressional and campaign websites, as well as in their public appearances.
Methodology and Data
The websites examined for this report were all examined between
November 16th and November 22nd, 2020, and were found for the current
House Democrats listed on Congress.gov, minus those lacking a relevant
website. This included non-voting colonial delegates from Washington,
D.C., and Pacific and Caribbean islands. It excluded the deceased Elijah
Cummings and Donald Payne; the defeated Eliot Engels, Joseph Kennedy,
and Collin Peterson; the retiring Nita Lowey and Jose Serrano; and those
no site could be found for: Daniel Kildee, Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, and Bennie Thompson
(the Homeland Security Chairman's website appears to have been hacked).
Added to the 229 Congress members listed at Congress.gov for whom a
relevant website was found were 15 newly elected members, bringing the
total of websites examined to 244. Not included were new candidates who
failed to win election.
Those websites considered to have an issues section were those with any sort of policy platform under any name -- "priorities" or "agenda" or "platform" or "record." Sometimes these included lengthy treatises on dozens of topics. Other times they consisted of a single sentence or less per issue. Sometimes they were buried in the "about me" section or otherwise hard to find. Sometimes they consisted of lists of bills sponsored or voted for, or just a series of photos with captions. Sometimes the whole issues section was on the homepage. Most issues sections contained numerous topics. Some contained very few. A website that contained only information on COVID pandemic resources was not considered to possess an issues section. Of incumbents' sites, 176 had issues sections. Of newcomers' sites, 15 had issues sections. That amounts to 78% of the total 244 websites examined. Of incumbents' sites, 53 had no issues sections. Of newcomers' sites, 0 had no issues sections.
Of incumbents' sites, 65 had a foreign policy section. Of newcomers' sites, 5 had a foreign policy section. Included in this count were 6 with a section only about Israel, one with a section only about Iran, and 2 with sections only about Russiagate. Not included was one with a section only against nuclear weapons testing. There were 52 websites, all belonging to incumbents, that promoted militarism in some way, usually very briefly, and 8 that were mixed or unclear, but 10 (listed above) that leaned toward reducing militarism.
Of incumbents' websites, 108, and of newcomers' 5, had sections on policies related to veterans.
These were the 15 websites of the newly elected House Democrats:
https://sarajacobsforca.com
https://carolyn4congress.com
https://nikemaforcongress.com
https://kaikahele.com
https://marienewmanforcongress.com
https://mrvanforcongress.com
https://jakeforma.com
What Can Be Done
RootsAction has created an online action page for emailing your Congress member and asking them to take prominent public positions on key questions of foreign policy and spending priorities, on both their Congressional and campaign websites, as well as in their public appearances.
Methodology and Data
Those websites considered to have an issues section were those with any sort of policy platform under any name -- "priorities" or "agenda" or "platform" or "record." Sometimes these included lengthy treatises on dozens of topics. Other times they consisted of a single sentence or less per issue. Sometimes they were buried in the "about me" section or otherwise hard to find. Sometimes they consisted of lists of bills sponsored or voted for, or just a series of photos with captions. Sometimes the whole issues section was on the homepage. Most issues sections contained numerous topics. Some contained very few. A website that contained only information on COVID pandemic resources was not considered to possess an issues section. Of incumbents' sites, 176 had issues sections. Of newcomers' sites, 15 had issues sections. That amounts to 78% of the total 244 websites examined. Of incumbents' sites, 53 had no issues sections. Of newcomers' sites, 0 had no issues sections.
Of incumbents' sites, 65 had a foreign policy section. Of newcomers' sites, 5 had a foreign policy section. Included in this count were 6 with a section only about Israel, one with a section only about Iran, and 2 with sections only about Russiagate. Not included was one with a section only against nuclear weapons testing. There were 52 websites, all belonging to incumbents, that promoted militarism in some way, usually very briefly, and 8 that were mixed or unclear, but 10 (listed above) that leaned toward reducing militarism.
Of incumbents' websites, 108, and of newcomers' 5, had sections on policies related to veterans.
These were the 15 websites of the newly elected House Democrats:
https://sarajacobsforca.com
https://carolyn4congress.com
https://nikemaforcongress.com
https://kaikahele.com
https://marienewmanforcongress.com
https://mrvanforcongress.com
https://jakeforma.com
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
