Wednesday, March 5, 2008

Why the Dept. of Peace bill is a bad idea

From Alan Korwin -

The arguments for the proposed federal Dept. of Peace (HR 818, Rep.
Kucinich, D-Ohio) are compelling, but the bill itself is nothing like
what the promoters are telling people. Under the banner of promoting
global peace, the bill, which I have studied:

-- Creates a massive expansion of the federal government

-- Takes at least $10 billion in taxpayer funds to hire new bureaucrats
and provide facilities

-- Imposes at least eight new Secretaries and Under Sectretaries with
extensive powers over the public

-- Introduces social-engineering programs for womens issues, racial
issues, gun control, drug and alcohol use, human potential movement,
sexual identity, police activity, government publicity and promotion,
school peer mediation, unspecified hate crimes, peace "education and
training," a peace "curriculum" for government-run schools, religious
tolerance, financial "rights," criminal rehabilitation, and a cluster of
other social programs upon which Congress is not in agreement

-- Puts animal "rights" at a cabinet level

-- Has the potential to hamstring the military while they fight to
defend the nation*

-- Opens access to top secret operations of the National Security

-- Is designed to grow as all federal agencies do, directly tied to the
DOD budget

-- Generates a long list of grants to special interests

-- Duplicates much of the work of the Institute for Peace already
running in the State Dept.

Legislators should read the bill before voting.
You will get caught with egg on your face if you do not.

The idea of promoting world peace is noble, honorable and has my full

Terri Mansfield, the main proponent of HR 818, is a talented activist
and hard worker. She seems sincere to me and is tireless in her efforts.
She does not, however, seem to understand what the bill she is promoting
would actually do. The bill's requirements are contrary to the great
lines she uses to promote HR 818.

The idea of massive new federal spending, enlarging the federal
bureaucracy and imposing scores of new social programs, simply by
talking about how wonderful peace would be, is a terrible idea and
should be rejected outright.

Government operates through the use of force and is the main
perpetrator of war. Empowering it further by using the word peace is
wrong headed. Read the bill.

Alan Korwin.


(a) Consultation in Cases of Conflict- (1) In any case in which a
conflict between the United States and any other government or entity is
imminent or occurring, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of
State shall consult with the Secretary [or Peace] concerning nonviolent
means of conflict resolution.

Note: The extent of this mandatory consultation is undefined.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I came across your blog and I felt compelled to share my opinion with you.

The bill to which you are referring is 808 not 818.

Consolidating the best practices available to American citizens under one umbrella, that would work towards reducing school violence, gang violence, domestic abuse, domestic and world conflict should be the #1 priority of our government.

Creating a department in the Executive Branch that works towards preventing violence not only is cost effective but it saves lives. Yes like all other departments there are secretaries that run them. However, unlike other departments, this Secretary would have a background and degree in peace-building/nonviolent communication within the President's Cabinet of decision makers. Are there any decision-makers within the President's immediate cabinet with this experience or knowledge? Wouldn't it be wise to have a balanced cabinet that would represent both sides, to war and peace?

The proposed Federal Discretionary Spending Budget for 2007 was 1.114 Trillion. The proposed funding for a Department of Peace and Nonviolence (HR-808) is less than 1% of the Federal Budget (equals 8 billion). Investing 8 billion into our own country to establish preventive measures to reduce the rising rate of violence domestically and internationally is well worth it. Ask a soldier's family if they are against the United States government working towards preventing violence or war by making it a national priority. Ask a policeman or a fireman. Ask paramedics or emergency room doctors. It makes all their jobs a little safer and a little easier.

In just 2007 citizens will pay $137.6 billion for the cost of the Iraq War which is not included in the 2007 budget. Had a Department of Peace and Nonviolence been established in 2007, $129.60 billion would have been left.

Taxpayers in the United States have paid $522.5 billion for the Iraq War thus far. For the same amount of money, the following could have been provided:
153,995,332 People with Health Care
230,292,880 Children with Health Care
8,583,162 Elementary School Teachers
7,549,214 Port Container Inspectors

It is clear that when passed the bill, would not take anything away from the Department of Defense. Defense of our country is mandatory. When I think about this, the old saying, "The best Defense is having a good Offense" comes to mind. Makes me wonder how much greater we could be and how many lives would be saved, with a great offense in place.

Preventive measures, save lives.

Best Wishes,

Ana Campos
State Coordinator (South Florida Region)
US Department of Peace and Nonviolence Movement
Email ACampos_2001 AT

"We can't do it by ourselves, but if enough of us do it, we change the cultural climate, and then the leaders follow."
-- Riane Eisler

National Website: