This weekend, on the eve of the fourth anniversary of the US invasion of Iraq, antiwar activists in Seattle and across the country will stage rallies and marches to commemorate the occasion and to protest the current escalation of the US occupation of Iraq. These long-ago-planned public events will likely draw hundreds, if not thousands, of kindred spirits to each participating venue--and will in turn likely have little, if any, genuinely measurable impact upon current White House policy in the Middle East.

Dude, are you psyched?

Certain readers will, I hope, kindly forgive my skepticism toward this weekend's grand antiwar events--especially if, like me, they have personally experienced the wild rollercoaster ride of activist morale that so many of Seattle's lefty locals have endured in the past decade. The wild ride in question reached its empowering zenith in the wake of the 1999 WTO protests--whose shattering impact upon global trade debate and policy is still being felt today--and all-too-swiftly swooped down to its nadir in the wake of Feb. 15, 2003, the day an unprecedented eleven-million-plus people worldwide protested the impending invasion of Iraq, only to be dismissed by George W. Bush (and the folks he fronts for) as an irrelevant "focus group."

Now, in our current strange age, when the Old Left and the New Left are both apparently paradigms of the past, the rollercoaster seems to be arching upward again, both locally and nationally--especially after last November's elections put (if certain liberal pundits are prescient) an apparent end to the Reagan Revolution. But perhaps not fast enough, as far too few in the new Democratic Congressional majority are taking decisive action to once-and-for-all pour ice down the pants of the militarist madmen who misled us into the Iraq quagmire--and who are presently waving their withering little warmongers towards Iran, with nothing less than nukular consummation on their dirty imperialist minds.

What's an antiwar citizen to do when faced with such grievous government "leadership," post-Feb. 15, 2003? Stage yet another impotent rally in Seattle's Westlake Park (or any other nationally-noted zocalo)? Stage an occupation of a timid Congresscritter's local office, thereby firing up one's fellow radicals while counterproductively pissing off otherwise-sympathetic moderates? Lately more than a few lefties--this writer among them--have come to believe that certain old tactics, from both the Old and the New Left, just don't work anymore, having long ago become part of the dissent-diffusing lessons that The Man learned from the Vietnam War era. Hence, if one follows the Angela Davis definition of the word "radical"--i.e., "grasping things at the root"--one should be wise enough to recognize that, in 2007, the most "radical" answer to a lawless White House just might lie in the legislative process, rather than shouting stale slogans in the streets.

While there's presently plenty for progressives to gripe about with respect to the 110th Congress, there are also in fact folks in Washington, DC who were newly-empowered by the people on Nov. 7, and whose agendas and legislative efforts do in fact reflect their constituents' wishes--and are therefore worth supporting. The most crucial of these efforts for faithful readers of this paper are obviously those aimed at reigning in the neocons' overripe jihad in the Middle East--especially before it spills over from Iraq into a wider war.

Two specific efforts toward the latter end merit particular attention and progressive support. First, Barbara Lee (D-CA) has introduced House Resolution 770, the Iran Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 2007, which would make it official US policy "not to enter into a preemptive war against Iran in the absence of an imminent threat, and then only in accordance with international law and constitutional and statutory requirements for congressional authorization." It would also prohibit the use of funds for "any covert action for the purpose of causing regime change in Iran or to carry out any military action against Iran in the absence of an imminent threat, in accordance with international law." H.R. 770's original co-sponsors include Reps. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), John Conyers (D-MI), and Maxine Waters (D-CA).

Second, Walter Jones (R-NC)--yes, Virginia, there are sane and bipartisan Republicans--has introduced House Joint Resolution 14, with bipartisan co-sponsors, including Reps. Ron Paul (R-TX), John Larson (D-CT), Richard Neal (D-MA), Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD), Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) and Marty Meehan (D-MA). H.J.R. 14 states simply, "Absent a national emergency created by attack by Iran, or a demonstrably imminent attack by Iran, upon the United States, its territories or possessions or its armed forces, the President shall consult with Congress, and receive specific authorization pursuant to law from Congress, prior to initiating any use of military force against Iran."

In his official statement on H.J.R. 14, Jones says, "Too many times this Congress has abdicated its Constitutional duty. Our Constitution states that, while the Commander in Chief has the power to conduct wars, only Congress has the power to authorize war. It's time for Congress to meet its Constitutional responsibility."

Lee's legislation is the more forceful of the two, since Jones's does admit the possibility of the "necessity" of military confrontation with Iran. Toward the end of his statement, Jones says, "If military action against Iran is necessary, then we in Congress will meet our Constitutional responsibility and authorize it." Lee, in contrast, has crafted H.R. 770's language not just to prevent an attack on Iran, but also to mandate active diplomatic engagement between Washington, DC and Teheran. Both bills stand as encouraging examples for other Congressmembers to follow in their own legislative actions.

No word yet on whether Jim McDermott, Jay Inslee, or any other of Washington State's halfway-decent Congresscritters have considered signing on to either of these bills--but that, of course, is subject to constituent pressure. Meantime, go to this weekend's marches, join the Occupation Project in Maria Cantwell's office, whatever activist tactic, old or new, suits your taste and temperament. But don't forget that there's lately as much to advocate for as to protest against--and the legislative floor can be just as much a radical hot spot as the local zocalo.