By Patrick McGroarty
Reporter Staff

A bill introduced last week by Congressman Stephen Lynch would establish a committee to oversee the transition of authority in Iraq from the jurisdiction of the U.S. Military to that of the recently elected Iraqi government, but doesn't go far enough to satisfy anti-war advocates in his ninth district who are displeased with the Lynch's record on the war in Iraq.

Lynch introduced the Iraqi Transition Act on June 30, a bill that would establish a national commission to oversee the transition of authority in Iraq from the jurisdiction of the U.S. military to that of the recently elected Iraqi government. Lynch, who voted to authorize the war in Iraq in October 2002, has since characterized that decision as a "mistake," though his refusal to support a definite timeline for withdrawal has failed to appease anti-war constituents.

"We need an individual body that would focus on this one job," Lynch told the Reporter. "It needs to be someone's top priority if not their only priority."

Reaction to Lynch's proposed bill was mixed in his ninth congressional district. While Lynch loyalists at Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 65 praised Lynch for his commitment to the war on terror, neighborhood peace advocates who favor an immediate and complete withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq were dissatisfied. Members of Dorchester People for Peace, an organization that has publicly criticized Lynch for voting to authorize the war, said the act stops well short of their requests.

"Representative Lynch's legislation goes in the wrong direction and seems to pay no attention to realities, not those on the ground in Iraq nor in Washington," said Dan McLaughlin, a member of Dorchester People for Peace (DPP) in an e-mail. "Rep. Lynch has done nothing substantive to show for [his verbal commitment to withdrawing from Iraq] though he has had the chance."

For several years, Lynch has said that he voted to authorize the Iraq War based on classified information provided by the State Department that he has since determined to be false. At a public forum held at Curry College in Milton on February 7, he went as far as to call his decision to vote for the war in Iraq a mistake. Several people in the audience that evening, including DPP members, asked Lynch to establish a concrete timeline for withdrawing troops from Iraq. Last week, Lynch said this proposal is as close to a timeline as he is willing to tread.

"This act does set forth a timetable, but it would be built upon evaluations of the transition to Iraqi control," said Lynch, who has made five trips to Iraq since the war began. "Every time you go over, you get a different answer on the progress that's being made."

At the VFW Post 65 hall in Adams Village on Tuesday afternoon, several veterans said they firmly supported both Lynch's initial decision to go into Iraq, and his proposed commission.

"You cannot put a time limit on support of a war," said retired Navy commander William Wright. "We need to stay until we've finished what needs to be done. You can't cut and run from terrorists."

The proposed commission, said Wright, would be an appropriate way to transfer control of services such as electricity and water to the competent and resourceful Iraqi people.

Lynch's bill was inspired by the Filipino Rehabilitation Commission Act of 1944, which facilitated a transfer of power from the U.S. military to a local civilian government after the island was liberated from Japanese occupation at the end of World War II. The newly proposed act calls for the creation of a 21-member committee comprised of seven senators, seven representatives, and seven presidential appointees.

"One of the flaws of this president has been that he seems to be waiting for a moment of peace and quiet to make a transfer of power," said Lynch. "That's not going to happen, and it's important in the eyes of the Iraqis themselves to see their government take over some responsibility."

Lynch is up for reelection this fall, and while DPP has not officially endorsed a candidate, many DPP members helped collect signatures for Phil Dunkelbarger, a Westwood Democrat who will challenge Lynch in the September primary. Contesting Lynch's record on the war in Iraq is a cornerstone of Dunkelbarger's campaign, and he said in a phone interview on Tuesday that the Iraqi Resolution Act is characteristic of Lynch's history in dealing with the war.

"It is really an effort to project the image of us ending [military] involvement, and in the end it is only creating another commission to do another study to create more reports and recommendations without a timeframe to achieve any results," said Dunkelbarger. "It's a vacant and transparent policy motivated by an attempt to get on the right side of an issue he's been on the wrong side of for far too long."

Dunkelbarger also cited Lynch's dissent from the Massachusetts delegation in voting on June 17 for the Republican-led "Stay the Course," initiative. In a statement, Dunkelbarger said the Iraqi Resolution Act was evidence that Lynch was "finally acknowledging the extreme dissatisfaction, and growing anger, of a majority of his constituents, whom he has failed to represent on this issue since October of 2002."

While Lynch acknowledges that he has taken heat from constituents for his past decisions regarding the war, he insists this most recent act had nothing to do with the upcoming election or constituent pressure.

"It certainly won't satisfy the 'stay the course' crowd; it won't satisfy the folks that want an immediate evacuation," said Lynch. "But it sounds like a reasonable plan, and it can work. I don't play politics with the lives of our solders. You do what you think is right, and what you think will work best for them."