Tim Walberg on War & Peace


Finish mission in Iraq to assure the victory of freedom

Tim wholeheartedly supports President Bush in the War on Terror. He supports Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and our troops as they finish the mission in Iraq to assure the victory of freedom over tyranny.
Source: 2006 House campaign website, walbergforcongress.com “Issues” , Nov 7, 2006

Voted YES on banning armed forces in Libya without Congressional approval.

RESOLUTION Declaring that the President shall not deploy, establish, or maintain the presence of US Armed Forces in Libya, pursuant to the War Powers Resolution.
    The House of Representatives makes the following statements of policy:
  1. The US Armed Forces shall be used exclusively to defend and advance the national security interests of the US.
  2. The President has failed to provide Congress with a compelling rationale based upon US national security interests for current US military activities regarding Libya.
  3. The President shall not deploy, establish, or maintain the presence of units and members of the US Armed Forces on the ground in Libya unless the purpose of the presence is to rescue a member of the Armed Forces from imminent danger.
The President shall transmit a report describing in detail US security interests and objectives, and the activities of US Armed Forces, in Libya since March 19, 2011, including a description of the following:
  1. The President's justification for not seeking authorization by Congress for the use of military force in Libya.
  2. US political and military objectives regarding Libya, including the relationship between the intended objectives and the operational means being employed to achieve them.
  3. Changes in US political and military objectives following the assumption of command by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
  4. Differences between US political and military objectives regarding Libya and those of other NATO member states engaged in military activities.
  5. The specific commitments by the US to ongoing NATO activities regarding Libya.
  6. The anticipated scope and duration of continued US military involvement in Libya.
  7. The costs of military, political, and humanitarian efforts concerning Libya as of June 3, 2011.
Congress has the constitutional prerogative to withhold funding for any unauthorized use of the US States Armed Forces, including for unauthorized activities regarding Libya.
Reference: Resolution on Libya; Bill HRes294 ; vote number 11-HV410 on Jun 3, 2011

Voted NO on removing US armed forces from Afghanistan.

Congressional Summary:
    Directs the President, pursuant to the War Powers Resolution, to remove the U.S. Armed Forces from Afghanistan:
  1. by no later than 30 days after this resolution is adopted; or
  2. if the President determines that it is not safe to remove them by such date, by no later than December 31, 2011.

Proponent's Argument for voting Yes:
[Rep. Kucinich, D-OH]:The American people oppose this war by a margin of two to one. Nearly 2/3 of Americans say the war isn't worth fighting. We are spending $100 billion per year on this war. There are those who are saying the war could last at least another 10 years. Are we willing to spend another $1 trillion on a war that doesn't have any exit plan, for which there is no timeframe to get out, no endgame, where we haven't defined our mission? The question is not whether we can afford to leave. The question is, can we afford to stay? And I submit we cannot afford to stay. The counterintelligence strategy of General Petraeus is an abysmal failure, and it needs to be called as such.

Opponent's Argument for voting No:
[Rep. Ros-Lehtinen, R-FL]: This resolution would undermine the efforts of our military and our international partners in Afghanistan and would gravely harm our Nation's security. 3,000 people died on Sep. 11 because we walked away once from Afghanistan, thinking that it didn't matter who controlled that country. We were wrong then. Let us not make the same mistake twice. Completing our mission in Afghanistan is essential to keeping our homeland safe. This is about our vital national security interests. It is about doing what is necessary to ensure that al Qaeda and other extremists cannot reestablish safe havens such as the ones they had in Afghanistan when the 9/11 attacks were planned against our Nation and our people. The enemy, indeed, is on the run. It is demoralized and divided. Let us not give up now.

Reference: Resolution on Afghanistan; Bill HConRes28 ; vote number 11-HV193 on Mar 17, 2011

Voted NO on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq.

OnTheIssues.org Explanation: This vote is on referring the impeachment resolution to a Congressional Committee to decide further action (not on impeachment itself).

Congressional Summary: Resolved, That President George W. Bush be impeached for committing the following abuses of power:

Proponents' arguments for voting YEA: Rep. Kucinich: Now is the time for this Congress to examine the actions that led us into this war, just as we must work to bring our troops home. This resolution is a very serious matter and I urge the Committee on Judiciary to investigate and carefully consider this resolution.

Rep. Wasserman-Schultz: Impeachment is a lengthy process which would divide Congress and this nation even more deeply than we are divided right now. Referring this resolution to the House Judiciary Committee is the constitutionally appropriate process that should be pursued.

Rep. Ron Paul: I rise, reluctantly, in favor of referring that resolution to the House Judiciary Committee for full consideration, which essentially directs the committee to examine the issue more closely than it has done to this point.

Reference: The Kucinich Privilege Resolution; Bill H.RES.1258 ; vote number 2008-401 on Jun 11, 2008

Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days.

To provide for the redeployment of US Armed Forces and defense contractors from Iraq. Requires within 90 days to commence the redeployment; and to complete such redeployment within 180 days after its commencement. Prohibits the use of DOD funds to increase the number of US forces serving in Iraq in excess of the number serving in Iraq as of January 1, 2007, unless specifically authorized by Congress. Authorizes retaining in Iraq US forces for providing security for diplomatic missions; for targeting al-Qaeda; and for training Iraqi Security Forces. Requires the President to transfer to the government of Iraq all interest held by the US in any military facility in Iraq.

Proponents support voting YES because:

This war is a terrible tragedy, and it is time to bring it to an end. This is a straightforward bill to redeploy our military forces from Iraq and to end the war in Iraq. This bill does not walk away from the Iraqi people. It specifically continues diplomatic, social, economic, and reconstruction aid. Finally, this bill leaves all the decisions on the locations outside of Iraq to which our troops will be redeployed wholly in the hands of our military commanders.

Opponents support voting NO because:

This legislation embraces surrender and defeat. This legislation undermines our troops and the authority of the President as commander in chief. Opponents express concern about the effects of an ill-conceived military withdrawal, and about any legislation that places military decisions in the hands of politicians rather than the military commanders in the field. The enemy we face in Iraq view this bill as a sign of weakness. Now is not the time to signal retreat and surrender. It is absolutely essential that America, the last remaining superpower on earth, continue to be a voice for peace and a beacon for freedom in our shrinking world.

Reference: Out of Iraq Caucus bill; Bill H R 2237 ; vote number 2007-330 on May 10, 2007

Strengthen sanctions on Syria & assist democratic transition.

Walberg co-sponsored strengthening sanctions on Syria & assist democratic transition

A bill to strengthen sanctions against the Government of Syria, to enhance multilateral commitment to address the Government of Syria's threatening policies, to establish a program to support a transition to a democratically-elected government in Syria.

Source: Syria Accountability and Liberation Act (S2917/HR2332) 08-S2917 on Apr 24, 2008

Boycott & sanctions against Iran for terrorism & nukes.

Walberg signed Iran Threat Reduction Act

Source: H.R.1905 11-HR1905 on May 13, 2011

Iranian nuclear weapons: prevention instead of containment.

Walberg co-sponsored Resolution on Iran's nuclear program

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives, that Congress--
  1. Reaffirms that the US Government has a vital interest in working together to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability;
  2. warns that time is limited to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability;
  3. urges continued and increasing economic and diplomatic pressure on Iran until a full and sustained suspension of all uranium enrichment-related activities;
  4. expresses that the window for diplomacy is closing;
  5. expresses support for the universal rights and democratic aspirations of the people of Iran;
  6. strongly supports US policy to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability;
  7. rejects any US policy that would rely on containment as an option in response to the Iranian nuclear threat.
Source: HRes568/SR41 12-HJR568 on Mar 1, 2012

Intervene in Iraq to protect persecuted Christians.

Walberg signed Relief to Nineveh Plain of Iraq

Congressional Summary:

Calling for urgent international intervention on behalf of Iraqi civilians facing a dire humanitarian crisis in the Nineveh Plain region of Iraq.

Argument in opposition: (by The Christian Post)

ISIS has asked minorities to flee, convert to Islam, or be killed. H.Con. Res. 110 makes it a priority to protect Christians and other religious minorities in Iraq and create safe havens for them. Yazidis are viewed by the ISIS as "devil worshipers."

Argument in opposition: (by Baltimore Nonviolence Center, July 26, 2014)

[We're seeking] action to keep us from sliding back to war in Iraq. On July 25, the House passed H. Con. Res. 105, the proposal to keep U.S. troops out of Iraq, by an overwhelming vote of 370-40. By passing the Iraq War Powers Resolution, Congress made clear that they stand with the American public, who do not want to go back to war in Iraq.

Source: H.C.R.110 14_HCR110 on Jul 24, 2014

Work with Iraqi government to fight ISIL.

Walberg signed Resolution on ISIL

Congressional Summary:

RESOLUTION Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives on the current situation in Iraq and the urgent need to protect religious minorities from persecution from the Sunni Islamist insurgent and terrorist group the Islamic State in Iraq and Levant (ISIL) as it expands its control over areas in northwestern Iraq.

  • Whereas ISIL has a stated mission of establishing an Islamic state and a caliphate across the Levant through violence against Shiites, non-Muslims, and unsupportive Sunnis;
  • Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
  • calls on the US Department of State to work with the Kurdistan Regional Government, the Iraqi central government, neighboring countries, the diaspora community in the US, and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees to help secure safe havens for those claiming amnesty in Iraq; and
  • requests the addition of a Special Representative for Religious Minorities to [the Iraqi] government.

    Reporting pro & con by Politico.com, Sept. 17, 2014:

    Secretary of State John Kerry said arming the moderate opposition in Syria was the "best counterweight" against ISIL and emphasized to lawmakers: "ISIL must be defeated. Period." However, "US ground troops will not be sent into combat in this conflict," Kerry testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "Instead, they will support Iraq forces on the ground as they fight for their country."

    Protesters from the anti-war group Code Pink stood up, held signs and chanted "No more war!" Kerry turned his attention to the protesters, and told them that while he was sympathetic to their opposition to war, if they believed in the broader mission of Code Pink, "then you ought to care about fighting ISIL." Stressing that the Islamic State was "killing and raping and mutilating women" and "making a mockery of a peaceful religion," Kerry told the protesters: "There is no negotiation with ISIL."

    Source: H.RES.683 14_HRes683 on Jul 24, 2014

    2012 Governor, House and Senate candidates on War & Peace: Tim Walberg on other issues:
    MI Gubernatorial:
    Jennifer Granholm
    Mark Schauer
    Rick Snyder
    MI Senatorial:
    Debbie Stabenow
    Gary Peters
    Matt Wiedenhoeft
    Terri Lynn Land

    Newly-elected Democrats taking office Jan.2015:
    AZ-7: Rep.-Elect Ruben Gallego
    CA-11:Rep.-Elect Mark DeSaulnier
    CA-31:Rep.-Elect Pete Aguilar(R⇒D)
    CA-33:Rep.-Elect Ted Lieu
    CA-35:Rep.-Elect Norma Torres
    FL-2: Rep.-Elect Gwen Graham(R⇒D)
    HI-1: Rep.-Elect Mark Takai
    MA-6: Rep.-Elect Seth Moulton
    MI-12:Rep.-Elect Debbie Dingell
    MI-14:Rep.-Elect Brenda Lawrence
    NE-2: Rep.-Elect Brad Ashford(R⇒D)
    NJ-12:Rep.-Elect Bonnie Coleman
    NY-4: Rep.-Elect Kathleen Rice
    PA-13:Rep.-Elect Brendan Boyle
    VA-8: Rep.-Elect Donald Beyer
    Seated in special elections 2013-2014:
    AL-1: Bradley Byrne(R)
    FL-13:David Jolly(R)
    FL-19:Curt Clawson(R)
    IL-2: Robin Kelly(D)
    LA-5: Vance McAllister(R)
    MA-5: Katherine Clark(D)
    MO-8: Jason Smith(R)
    NC-12:Alma Adams(D)
    NJ-1: Donald Norcross(D)
    SC-1: Mark Sanford(R)
    VA-7: Dave Brat(R)

    Newly-elected Republicans taking office Jan.2015:
    AR-2: Rep.-Elect French Hill
    AR-4: Rep.-Elect Bruce Westerman
    AL-6: Rep.-Elect Gary Palmer
    CA-25:Rep.-Elect Steve Knight
    CA-45:Rep.-Elect Mimi Walters
    CO-4: Rep.-Elect Ken Buck
    FL-26:Rep.-Elect Carlos Curbelo(D⇒R)
    GA-1: Rep.-Elect Buddy Carter
    GA-10:Rep.-Elect Jody Hice
    GA-11:Rep.-Elect Barry Loudermilk
    GA-12:Rep.-Elect Rick Allen(D⇒R)
    IA-1: Rep.-Elect Rod Blum(D⇒R)
    IA-3: Rep.-Elect David Young
    IL-10:Rep.-Elect Robert Dold(D⇒R)
    IL-12:Rep.-Elect Mike Bost(D⇒R)
    More newly-elected Republicans taking office Jan.2015:
    LA-5: Rep.-Elect Ralph Abraham
    LA-6: Rep.-Elect Garret Graves
    ME-2: Rep.-Elect Bruce Poliquin(D⇒R)
    MI-4: Rep.-Elect John Moolenaar
    MI-8: Rep.-Elect Mike Bishop
    MI-11:Rep.-Elect Dave Trott
    MN-6: Rep.-Elect Tom Emmer
    MT-0: Rep.-Elect Ryan Zinke
    NC-6: Rep.-Elect Mark Walker
    NC-7: Rep.-Elect David Rouzer(D⇒R)
    NH-1: Rep.-Elect Frank Guinta(D⇒R)
    NJ-3: Rep.-Elect Tom MacArthur
    NV-4: Rep.-Elect Cresent Hardy(D⇒R)
    NY-1: Rep.-Elect Lee Zeldin(D⇒R)
    NY-21:Rep.-Elect Elise Stefanik(D⇒R)
    NY-24:Rep.-Elect John Katko
    OK-5: Rep.-Elect Steve Russell
    PA-6: Rep.-Elect Ryan Costello
    TX-4: Rep.-Elect John Ratcliffe
    TX-23:Rep.-Elect Will Hurd
    TX-36:Rep.-Elect Brian Babin
    UT-4: Rep.-Elect Mia Love(D⇒R)
    VA-10:Rep.-Elect Barbara Comstock
    WA-4: Rep.-Elect Dan Newhouse
    WI-6: Rep.-Elect Glenn Grothman
    WV-2: Rep.-Elect Alex Mooney
    WV-3: Rep.-Elect Evan Jenkins(D⇒R)
    Civil Rights
    Foreign Policy
    Free Trade
    Govt. Reform
    Gun Control
    Health Care
    Homeland Security
    Social Security
    Tax Reform

    Main Page
    Wikipedia Profile
    Ballotpedia Profile
    MI politicians
    MI Archives

    Contact info:
    House Contact
    Mailing Address:
    Office 418 CHOB, Wash., DC 20515
    Phone number:
    Search for...

    Page last updated: Dec 27, 2014