Posted on 02/16/2007 10:38:21 AM PST by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - Democrats pushed a measure critical of President Bush's Iraq policy to the brink of House passage on Friday, the culmination of an extraordinary four-day debate over a war that has killed more than 3,100 U.S. troops.
"The passage of this legislation will signal a change in direction that will end the fighting and bring our troops home," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) said in prepared remarks, endorsing the measure that takes issue with Bush's decision to send an additional 21,500 U.S. troops into battle.
Republicans battled to the end against the measure, saying resolve is more important than resolutions and warning against the follow-up measures that some Democrats advocate to force a change in policy.
"There are serious consequences to our national security if we fail in Iraq," said Rep. Steve Chabot (news, bio, voting record), R-Ohio. "Cutting off funding, limiting military options, or pushing for immediate withdrawal will only make our future more dangerous. It is time to stop the politics, stop the games, stop the finger pointing and do what is best for America."
There was no doubt about the outcome of the vote, with nearly all Democrats in favor and as many as two dozen or so Republicans expected to break ranks.
Passage would set the stage for a test vote Saturday in the Senate, where Republicans have said they intend to block consideration of the measure unless Democrats grant equal treatment to an alternative measure that opposes cutting funds for the troops.
"I will do everything in my power to ensure the House resolution dies an inglorious death in the Senate," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C.
The House measure disapproves of Bush's decision to increase troop strength, and commits Congress to "support and protect" the troops.
During the first three days of debate, 343 out of the 434 House members — 187 Democrats and 156 Republicans — spoke on the measure.
They did so at a time of growing public weariness over the war.
More than half of those surveyed say the Iraq war is a hopeless cause, according to an AP-Ipsos poll released Friday. A total of 38 percent wants to cut money for the additional troops that Bush is sending to Iraq, and 29 percent want to cut off all funding for the war.
Democrats say the votes are the first step toward forcing Bush to change course in a war that has killed more than 3,100 U.S. troops and lost favor with voters.
"This country needs a dramatic change of course in Iraq and it is the responsibility of this Congress to consummate that change," said Rep. John Murtha (news, bio, voting record), who chairs the House panel that oversees military spending.
Murtha, D-Pa., is preparing legislation that would set strict conditions on combat deployments, including a year rest between combat tours; ultimately, the congressman says, his measure would make it impossible for Bush to maintain his planned deployment of a total of about 160,000 troops for months on end.
Murtha's proposal also might block the funding of military operations inside Iran — a measure intended to send a signal to Bush that he will need Congress' blessing if he is planning another war.
"The president could veto it, but then he wouldn't have any money," Murtha told an anti-war group in an interview broadcast on movecongress.org.
Presidential spokesman Tony Snow said the president would oppose any effort to stop the administration's plan for Iraq, but held off on taking issue with the ideas being floated by Democratic leaders.
"Anything that is going to tie the hands of military commanders and deny both the funds and flexibility they're going to need, he will take a dim view of," Snow said. "We're just not going to get into trying to characterize a specific position about a bill that has yet to see the light of day."
Also Thursday, Bush received an update from Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The leaders discussed progress by Iraqis on a law determining how oil revenues will be shared and a budget that includes the $10 billion it is expected to spend on reconstruction, Snow said.
In an interview Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., noted that Bush consistently said he supports a diplomatic resolution to differences with Iran "and I take him at his word."
At the same time, she said, "I do believe that Congress should assert itself, though, and make it very clear that there is no previous authority for the president, any president, to go into Iran."
Bush said at a news conference Wednesday he has no doubt the Iranian government is providing armor-piercing weapons to kill American troops in Iraq. But he backed away from claims by senior U.S. military officials in Baghdad that the top echelon of Iran's government was responsible.
Administration critics have accused the president of looking for a pretense to attack Iran, at loggerheads with the United Nations about what Tehran says is a nuclear program aimed at developing energy for peaceful purposes.
In a speech Thursday, Bush said he expects Congress to live up to its promise to support the troops.
"We have a responsibility, Republicans and Democrats have a responsibility to give our troops the resources they need to do their job and the flexibility they need to prevail," Bush said.
___
Associated Press writers Jim Abrams and David Espo contributed to this report.
The resolution is H Con Res 63
On the Net:
Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov
Yeah, a U-turn.
It's like these radio ads that claim they can change your life. Hold up a minute, pardner. I don't need my life changed right now.
Yeah unfortunately it's in the opposite direction of our enemies.
"We don't care of Iraq becomes a satellite nation of Iran" said Nancypants on the House floor. "We just want to bring our boys home before the next election, then let the new President worry about cleaning up our messes."
US Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi(L), accompanied by colleague John Murtha, speaks to the press in Washington, DC, January 2007. Pelosi said she favors measures to support US military forces that would indirectly choke war funding, media reported.(AFP/File/Nicholas Kamm)
that whole winning thing isn't really working for them is it?
Delusions of grandeur.
Yes, do bring the troops home... because if they leave Iraq, they will be needed here to fight the Islamofacists on our home turf, making 911 look like a Sunday school picnic.
Then the Dems will claim they are responsible for things going better!
They've got too much in the defeat pot to fold up now.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Yeah those non-binding resolutions really leave a mark. /s
They just want us to lose...
'that will end the fighting'...but she neglects to add how a slaughter will then ensue...stupid b*tch.
There is no Iraq War so their action is directionless. Given the source why am I not surprised of the action!
She knows there'll be a slaughter she just doesn't give a flying bleep about it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.