[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Page 12611]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           VOTE EXPLANATIONS

  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I regret that on May 15 I was unable to 
vote on certain provisions of H.R. 1495, the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2007. I wish to address these votes, so that the 
people of the great State of Kansas, who elected me to serve them as 
U.S. Senator, may know my position.
  Regarding vote No. 163, on amendment No. 1090, I would not have voted 
in favor of this amendment. My vote would not have altered the final 
result of this vote.
  Regarding vote No. 164, on amendment No. 1089, I would not have voted 
in favor of this amendment. My vote would not have altered the final 
result of this vote.
  Regarding vote No. 165, on amendment No. 1086, I would have voted in 
favor of this amendment. My vote would not have altered the final 
result of this vote.
  Regarding vote No. 166, on amendment No. 1094, I would not have voted 
in favor of this amendment. My vote would not have altered the final 
result of this vote.
  Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I missed today's votes on Iraq because I 
was attending the college graduation of my daughter, Elizabeth.
  But I want to express my unqualified support for the amendment 
offered by my colleagues, Senator Feingold and Senator Reid.
  This amendment says that our entanglement in another country's civil 
war has gone on long enough.
  This amendment says that Congress must stop playing the role of 
spectator and start standing up for our over-taxed and inadequately 
protected troops.
  This amendment says we must stand up for their families.
  This amendment says that we have an obligation to support our men and 
women in uniform, not only by funding them, but by bringing them home.
  The funding for our troops is assured, whether they are deployed in 
Iraq or redeployed from Iraq.
  This amendment calls for their redeployment.
  Those who claim this amendment would cut off funding for our troops 
are actually saying that the President, if required to redeploy our 
troops, would instead cut off their funding.
  I may not see eye to eye with our President, but I don't believe him 
capable of that.
  The Feingold-Reid amendment says ``enough is enough.''
  A majority of Americans want our troops to come home. It is time to 
bring them home.
  I thank Senator Feingold and Leader Reid for having the conviction 
and the courage to stand up for our troops.
  Patriotism is not passive. It is not swayed by inflammatory rhetoric 
or false accusations.
  In the case of Iraq, patriotism does not mean blindly following the 
current path, it means carving out the right one.
  Bringing our troops home is an act of patriotism. The Feingold-Reid 
amendment is an act of patriotism, and I fully support its intent.

                          ____________________