Today, the Senate will begin debate on the Iraq War. The Democratic Party has two proposals to offer, neither of which, in my opinion, is acceptable because they both allow the war and the unneccessary killing to continue for far too long.

John Kerry's proposal is the "best" of the two but it still leaves the U.S. military in Iraq for another entire year--until July 31st 2007. I'm glad John Kerry has a clear position on the war--isn't that an improvement?--but our men and women who are putting their lives at risk for an immoral war should not have to endure another year of peril. And the Iraqis should not have to be subjected to the occupation of their country through the middle of next year.

And, yet, Kerry's proposal apparently has very little support among Democrats who are meekly rallying around the second proposal, which is far more weak and unacceptable--and, not surprising, it is apparently supported by my opponent. The Levin-Reed amendment would offer no specific timetable for withdrawal of the troops but "urge" the president to begin some unspecificed withdrawal by the end of the year (1,000 a year, 5,000 a year? who knows?)

I favor legislation proposed by Rep. Jim McGovern which calls for an immediate cut off of funding for any offensive action in Iraq and allows funding only for safe, rapid, immediate withdrawal from Iraq; replacement of the U.S. military with an international security force; and reconstruction of Iraq.

Let me say this: be optimistic about the work that you have done to bring this war to an end. My opponent is losing support every day in our state: her favorability ratings have now dropped to just 54 percent in a new Sienna poll--the lowest in 18 months--primarily because of her immoral support for the war. Our campaign and your work--the work of CodePink, the Grannies Against The War and others--have educated the voters in our state.

And our campaign has just begun.