13 anti-war activists visited Congressman Sam Farr's office on Monday. Still no word whether Farr will vote for or against the upcoming $75 billion appropriation to fund the war in Iraq. Activists decide to plan an action at Farr's office at 9AM the day after the vote to either protest or commend Farr depending on which way he votes.
13 activists visited the Santa Cruz offices of Rep. Sam Farr this afternoon at 2 p.m. We got an hour from aide Rachel Dann who agreed to convey our concerns to Farr. Becky Johnson recorded much of the discussion on
videotape. I got virtually all of it on audio tape and will be playing much of it Thursday 6-8 PM and Sunday 9:30 AM - 1 PM on Free Radio Santa Cruz at 96.3 FM.

The principal demands agreed upon by everyone there (except Rachel)were
(a) that Farr come out immediately and without qualification against Bush's $75 billion supplemental appropriation ($63 million of which is to conduct the war for the next month), and
(b) that Farr come out immediately for supporting our troops by withdrawing them.

We also asked him to come out for a ceasefire and a bombing halt.

Rachel said my phone call this morning was the first request from constituents asking that the troops be withdrawn--which I and others found hard to believe. She said she would keep a record of all calls. CALL
FARR'S OFFICE LOCALLY AT 429-1796 AND DEMAND THE TROOPS BE IMMEDIATELY WITHDRAWN, THE SUPPLEMENTAL MILITARY APPROPRIATION DEFEATED, AND THE RESULT OF THE PHONE CALLS
TABULATED.

Rachel defended Farr several times by saying that he was speaking out regularly against the war unlike many others in Congress. Folks in the group responded that talk was not enough and the key issue now was withdrawal of troops and no votes for further bombing and death.

Virginia, from Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, Louis La Fortune from the Green Party and several peace groups, Cassandra Brown, a founder of the Coalition for A Community Commons, Amy Courtney--who successfully challenged Cal-Trans "flags only" policy, Neil Mick of the
Santa Cruz/Capitola 13 (arrested for blocking the Recruiting Centers on 41st Avenue), Becky Johnson of Community Televison's Club Cruz, environmentalist Walt Milleson, musician Robert Nahas, Mumia Coalition activist John Thielking, Andrea Tischler of the Compassion Flower Inn and several others made up the group.

Steve Argue, who ran for City Council last November, and announced his (very early) candidacy for Farr's Congressional seat in 2004 two months ago, doubted that Farr would take real action to demand troop withdrawal by
voting against the appropriation. He suggested we show up en mass after the proposed Town Hall meeting on April 7th (at the Civic Center).

He suggested and the group agreed to call for a return to Farr's office on Wednesday April 9th at 3 PM to either toast Farr or to protest him--depending on his vote. The group also agreed to an emergency response, one day after the House votes on the appropriation at 9 a.m. the next day by coming to Farr's office to register our feelings and inviting everyone else to do the same.

I will try to keep tabs on the progress of Bush's Bombing Bill through the House Appropriations Committee and monitor Farr's votes.

Dann told the group that the $75 billion supplemental appropriation was in the House Appropriations Committee, of which Farr is a voting member. I asked Dann if she would ask Farr to give us a report on what was happening to the bill and what his position was. She said she was busy, but would try to do so.

I requested Farr clarify his stance on the appropriations bill last Wednesday by phone with Rachel. Rachel "explained" that the bill had not been "marked up" or finalized yet. That cut little weight with many of us
who demanded that Farr declare he would not vote for any military appropriation that envisaged continued war and occupation.

Other concerns unaddressed by Farr were the use of uranium-depleted weapons and napalm in Iraq, the expulsion and mistreatment of reporters by American forces, increasing civilian and American casualties.

In spite of repeated concerns that Farr introduce a resolution to impeach Bush, that has not been seriously considered by Farr. Rachel "explained" that the Republican domination of the house would stop it dead. Many said
they wanted it introduced anyway as a matter of principle and public education.

Seemed to some of us that Rachel was engaging in "damage control" and "spin" by defending Farr's failure to call for troop withdrawal, his "present" vote on the Support the President and the Troops resolution and his unwillingness
to clearly come out for troop withdrawal and against a new military appropriation.