Democrats not backing down on Iraq Bill
By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer 24 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - House Democratic leaders are indicating they are not ready to back down in their confrontation with
President Bush' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> President Bush on
Iraq' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Iraq, even as pressure mounts to approve new funding for U.S. troops.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., and other party leaders are considering a bill that would fund the war as Bush wants, but only guarantee the money through July. After that, Congress could block additional money from being sent if the Iraqi government does not meet certain political and security goals.
The proposal, not yet endorsed or briefed to caucus members, would be a direct challenge to the president, who has demanded Congress fund the war with no strings attached. This week, Bush vetoed a $124.2 billion bill that would have provided money for operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Afghanistan while requiring troops to begin coming home by Oct. 1.
White House officials and Republicans have chastised Democrats for holding up the war spending bill, saying U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan need the money now. Because Democrats do not hold a two-thirds majority to override Bush's veto, Republicans say Democrats ultimately will have to drop their demands or risk hurting the troops.
Democrats say they will provide troops in combat the resources they need and will send Bush a bill by the end of the month. The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has reported that the Army has enough bookkeeping flexibility to fund war operations until July.
In a closed-door leadership meeting Thursday, Rep. David Obey (news, bio, voting record), D-Wis., suggested that the House guarantee funding of the war only through July. The bill would provide additional money after that point, but give Congress a chance to deny those funds be used if the Iraqi government does not meet certain benchmarks.
Under Obey's proposal, members would vote separately on whether to fund some of the domestic spending in the Iraq bill that Bush opposed, such as agricultural assistance.
The plan was described by Democratic aides who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the plan. According to a senior Democratic leadership aide, the plan has not been endorsed by Pelosi or in the Senate.
The move likely would appease a large number of House Democrats who are reluctant to vote for a war spending bill unless it moves toward getting troops out of Iraq. Such a plan would signal to caucus members that the speaker was not willing to back down to Bush and, at the same time, support the troops.
While the House could narrowly pass the measure, it is unlikely to find similar backing in the Senate, where some leading Democrats say they want to fund the war through September.
One option for Pelosi would be to pass the bill only to agree to drop it later when it must be negotiated in the Senate.
Numerous other ideas are being floated in the Senate, most of which involve some combination of goals the Iraqi government must reach. The key impasse, however, is whether to require the withdrawal of U.S. troops if the benchmarks are not met.
Democratic Sens.
Hillary Rodham Clinton' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., and Robert Byrd (news, bio, voting record) of West Virginia proposed a measure to repeal the 2002 resolution authorizing force in Iraq. Under the bill, Bush would be required in October to seek Congress' blessing to continue operations in Iraq.
"If the president will not bring himself to accept reality, it is time for Congress to bring reality to him," said Clinton, a presidential contender for 2008.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino immediately shot down Clinton's proposal as a nonstarter, adding that such a bold suggestion was "troubling" in light of ongoing negotiations.
"Here we go again," Perino said in a statement. "The Senate is trying another way to put a surrender date on the calendar. Welcome to politics '08-style."
Several Republicans, including Sens. Susan Collins (news, bio, voting record) of Maine and John Sununu (news, bio, voting record) of New Hampshire and Reps. Roy Blunt (news, bio, voting record) of Missouri and Adam Putnam (news, bio, voting record) of Florida, have said they are open to restricting the more than $5 billion in aid for Iraq if the Baghdad government does not meet certain benchmarks.
The proposal, not yet endorsed or briefed to caucus members, would be a direct challenge to the president, who has demanded Congress fund the war with no strings attached. This week, Bush vetoed a $124.2 billion bill that would have provided money for operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Afghanistan while requiring troops to begin coming home by Oct. 1.
White House officials and Republicans have chastised Democrats for holding up the war spending bill, saying U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan need the money now. Because Democrats do not hold a two-thirds majority to override Bush's veto, Republicans say Democrats ultimately will have to drop their demands or risk hurting the troops.
Democrats say they will provide troops in combat the resources they need and will send Bush a bill by the end of the month. The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has reported that the Army has enough bookkeeping flexibility to fund war operations until July.
In a closed-door leadership meeting Thursday, Rep. David Obey (news, bio, voting record), D-Wis., suggested that the House guarantee funding of the war only through July. The bill would provide additional money after that point, but give Congress a chance to deny those funds be used if the Iraqi government does not meet certain benchmarks.
Under Obey's proposal, members would vote separately on whether to fund some of the domestic spending in the Iraq bill that Bush opposed, such as agricultural assistance.
The plan was described by Democratic aides who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the plan. According to a senior Democratic leadership aide, the plan has not been endorsed by Pelosi or in the Senate.
The move likely would appease a large number of House Democrats who are reluctant to vote for a war spending bill unless it moves toward getting troops out of Iraq. Such a plan would signal to caucus members that the speaker was not willing to back down to Bush and, at the same time, support the troops.
While the House could narrowly pass the measure, it is unlikely to find similar backing in the Senate, where some leading Democrats say they want to fund the war through September.
One option for Pelosi would be to pass the bill only to agree to drop it later when it must be negotiated in the Senate.
Numerous other ideas are being floated in the Senate, most of which involve some combination of goals the Iraqi government must reach. The key impasse, however, is whether to require the withdrawal of U.S. troops if the benchmarks are not met.
Democratic Sens.
Hillary Rodham Clinton' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., and Robert Byrd (news, bio, voting record) of West Virginia proposed a measure to repeal the 2002 resolution authorizing force in Iraq. Under the bill, Bush would be required in October to seek Congress' blessing to continue operations in Iraq.
"If the president will not bring himself to accept reality, it is time for Congress to bring reality to him," said Clinton, a presidential contender for 2008.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino immediately shot down Clinton's proposal as a nonstarter, adding that such a bold suggestion was "troubling" in light of ongoing negotiations.
"Here we go again," Perino said in a statement. "The Senate is trying another way to put a surrender date on the calendar. Welcome to politics '08-style."
Several Republicans, including Sens. Susan Collins (news, bio, voting record) of Maine and John Sununu (news, bio, voting record) of New Hampshire and Reps. Roy Blunt (news, bio, voting record) of Missouri and Adam Putnam (news, bio, voting record) of Florida, have said they are open to restricting the more than $5 billion in aid for Iraq if the Baghdad government does not meet certain benchmarks.
No comments:
Post a Comment