Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Politics

Veto just one round of coming Iraq volley

A Senate vote sets up a sure "no" from Bush, but more fronts are developing.

By WES ALLISON
Published March 30, 2007

WASHINGTON - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi often derides Iraq as the "war without end."

That could also describe the dispute over the war between Congress and President Bush.

Thursday's vote by the Senate to set a goal for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq - coming just days after the House did the same - almost certainly will be vetoed by the president.

But congressional Democrats already are looking ahead to other avenues for challenging the president's approach in Iraq, from the 2008 defense budget to congressional bills authorizing military, veterans and homeland security programs.

They're also trying to craft a long-term strategy that would hit the president where they believe he is weakest, while carefully avoiding any appearance they're weakening security.

"The struggle with the White House is going to go on for many months," said Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Tampa, who is on the Armed Services Committee. "We will look for every opportunity to ... demand we bring the troops home."

Thursday morning, after three days of debate, the Senate voted 51-47 to pass a $122-billion supplemental spending bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill also calls for the withdrawal of most U.S. troops from Iraq by March 31, 2008.

Two Republicans voted for it, while Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, an independent who usually votes with Democrats, voted against it.

The House passed a similar $124-billion bill last week that sets political and military benchmarks for the Iraqi government and demands the withdrawal of American forces by August 2008.

House and Senate negotiators will try to solve the differences in their bills during the Easter recess, with votes on a final bill expected by late April.

The president reiterated his promise Thursday to veto the final bill if it includes the roughly $24-billion in pork that both chambers added, as well as any deadline for pulling U.S. troops.

Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid say it will include both, setting up a high-stakes game of chicken over who gets tagged with blocking the funding for U.S. forces.

If Bush vetoes it, Congress must draft a new bill, which is needed to help fund the Defense Department.

A replay is promised

But Reid and Pelosi say the president can expect more of the same in the next version, and they aren't willing to yield unless he yields, too.

"We have a serious responsibility to sit down with the president and listen to his concerns," said Pelosi, D-Calif. "He has a responsibility to sit down and listen to ours."

Bush showed no signs he's willing to compromise.

"We stand united in saying loud and clear that when we've got a troop in harm's way, we expect that troop to be fully funded," he said Thursday. "We expect there to be no strings on our commanders, and ... we expect the Congress to be wise about how they spend the people's money."

Pennsylvania Democrat John Murtha, the chairman of a House military spending panel, said the real deadline for congressional action is June 1. By then, the Pentagon will have exhausted practical ways to shift funds to continue current operations in Iraq.

"We think it will be the end of May before it would really be a problem," Murtha said.

Regardless of how the standoff turns out, get ready for more.

The House Armed Services Committee, which has jurisdiction over military programs, is deep into hearings in advance of the next bill authorizing Defense Department activities for 2008. That could come to a vote by late spring or early summer.

Although members say it's too early to say how the committee's final bill might affect activities in Iraq, a spokeswoman said it is likely to require readiness standards for U.S. troops sent there, just as the House version of the supplemental spending bill does.

Under those terms, the president must certify that all troops sent to Iraq meet the military's own standards for rest, training and equipment, or the president must issue a waiver that explains why they don't.

Bush opposes that provision, on grounds that it usurps his role as commander in chief.

Democrats also have started work on the Defense Department's 2008 spending bill.

While that, too, is in its infancy, members from both parties say they expect it to include whatever restrictions fail to survive the supplemental spending bill.

These include a timetable for withdrawal and requirements that after 2008 U.S. troops be used only to protect U.S. interests, fight terrorism and patrol the Iraqi border.

"Those of us that oppose the war are going to look at each and every vehicle that's appropriate to bring this war to an end," said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., a member of the House leadership. "If the president thinks he can veto this and it's over, he's wrong."

Emboldened

Antiwar Democrats were emboldened by the Senate vote. They believe public opinion is with them and see no reason to back down.

Republican senators and representatives plan to use their time at home next week to sell the idea that Democrats are endangering troops by forcing a standoff with the president.

"They don't have a plan for success for the country. They have a plan for political success for the Democrats," said Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida, chairman of the Republican National Committee.

Republicans hope that Democrats are seen as overreaching.

They point to 1995, when a standoff between House Republicans and President Bill Clinton shut down the federal government.

The public blamed Congress, and Clinton's sagging poll numbers rebounded.

Rep. C.W. Bill Young of Indian Shores, the top Republican on the subcommittee that oversees defense spending, said he is talking with the White House and members of Congress in hopes of reaching a compromise on the supplemental bill.

If they do, he would expect the deal to hold for the full 2008 defense appropriations bill, due on the House floor by June. That would quell coming fights.

Asked if he was making any headway, he paused. "I'm finding that my ideas are not being rejected out of hand."

Information from Bloomberg was used in this report. Wes Allison can be reached at allison@sptimes.com or 202463-0577.

[Last modified March 30, 2007, 00:03:09]