This year my holiday greeting card features the word peace. Part of the reason I like the word is because I don’t want to offend any one. Peace is a concept that both the religious and nonreligious can understand and appreciate. The most important reason, however, that I choose peace is because I believe in it. As we approach Christmas, now seems like an appropriate time to reflect on who is working for it.

An organization called the Peace Majority Report has a Web site (peacemajority.org) that rates all members of Congress. There are three general areas in which the ratings are determined: votes that support, fund and authorize war, votes that make global peace institutions stronger and votes for “excessive investment in preparations for war.” Second District Rep. Mike Michaud scored the highest rating of all the Maine congressional delegation. Some of the key votes involved the Iraq war, the War on Terror’s detainee policy and our relationship with Cuba.

The Iraq war: On Nov. 3, House minority leader Nancy Pelosi introduced a resolution that would have forced Congress to investigate the abuses related to the Iraq war. Her resolution was tabled. Michaud voted against shelving the proposed inquiry. Among other things, the resolution called for an examination into the possible political manipulation of intelligence prior to the war, the relationship between Halliburton and Vice President Cheney and allegations of prisoner abuses.

It is pretty clear to me that a comprehensive congressional investigation is long overdue. How would an investigation relate to peace? It would be the first step toward coming to terms with the realities of the war, not just the hopes and fears associated with its possible outcome. An investigation would take us closer to some hidden, and probably dark, truths. Painful as these may be, they are necessary for a nonviolent Iraq to emerge.

We can’t expect a peaceful Iraq to materialize from an American policy built on secrecy and deception and implemented with corruption and abuse. Unless we really come clean about the war, any future American relationship with a post-Saddam government will be burdened by a deep skepticism from both American and Iraqi citizens. Successful future cooperation between the two governments on critical issues like terrorism could be imperiled.

Detainee policy: On July 20, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher introduced an amendment to a resolution which dealt with the Guantanamo Bay prison. Specifically, it stated that keeping the prison was essential to our national defense and winning the war on terror. Michaud was one of only 124 members who voted against it.

There have been many allegations of prisoner abuse at Guantanamo, including using torture techniques. Specifically, there have been claims that a Defense Department official wrapped a detainee in an Israeli flag and overwhelmed them with strobe lights and loud music. Another allegation is that a female official caressed and then grabbed the genitals of a detainee during Ramadan. At the very least, Guantanamo is a public relations disaster for us.

If there were more congressional pressure, perhaps the Bush administration might close down Guantanamo. No more Gitmo horror stories (true, false or exaggerated) could be instantly transmitted worldwide via the Internet. Imagine the positive international news that could be created if we took that step. We could move nearer to peace by denying the terrorists a potent tool for recruitment. Taking away this symbol of American hypocrisy can begin the process of repairing our image abroad. That won’t stop the terrorists, but it could slow their growth.

Cuba: On three separate occasions on June 30, Michaud voted to increase U.S. contact with the Caribbean nation: to end the U.S. trade embargo, to allow educational travel and to permit family travel to Cuba. Unfortunately, he ended up on the losing side of each vote.

The embargo is an outdated relic of the Cold War. Keeping it only gives Castro a plausible excuse for the economic suffering of his people. Ending the embargo would lessen hostilities between the U.S. and Cuba and contribute to a more peaceful relationship.

It is even more difficult to justify a ban on educational travel. We supposedly put freedom above all other values. If freedom is such a cherished ideal, why not permit freedom of inquiry? Couldn’t more independent information contribute to an eventual peace between Cuba and the U.S.?

Not allowing family travel increases the pain inflicted on the Cuban people. In theory, poverty, isolation and severed family ties might just provide the spark for a revolt against Castro. One small problem exists: The revolt should have been triggered years ago. We are still waiting.

Mike Michaud’s image is that of the average guy fighting for fair trade, good wages and health care for his constituents. Based on his voting record, he also can be seen as something else: an advocate of peace.

Karl Trautman has taught political science for more than 20 years. He has been a policy analyst for the Michigan Legislature and a research assistant for “Meet The Press.” He chairs the social sciences department at Central Maine Community College and can be reached at [email protected].