[President]Bush seeks prompt new war spending bill

President Bush, urging Congress to craft a war spending bill quickly, offered no clues Saturday about whether he'll compromise over linking U.S. support to stability in Iraq.

Bush and Congress have been talking about how to agree on a bill to finance combat operations through September. The president demands the money without strings attached, but Democrats say Bush eventually must accept some conditions on the U.S. commitment to the war.

Earlier this week, Bush vetoed a $124 billion bill that would have provided money for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan while requiring troops to begin returning home by Oct. 1.

"I vetoed the bill Congress sent me because it set a fixed date to begin to pull out of Iraq, imposed unworkable conditions on our military commanders and included billions of dollars in spending unrelated to the war," Bush said in his weekly radio address.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said Bush's veto would not deter Democrats from finding other ways to achieve their two goals of fully supporting the troops while dramatically changing the U.S. mission in Iraq.

"Mr. President, we know you oppose the resolution that Congress sent you last week, but on behalf of the American people and our soldiers, we ask you to work with us to find a way to both fund the troops and change the mission," Schumer said Saturday in the Democrats' weekly radio address.

After vetoing the bill, Bush dispatched three of his top aides to Capitol Hill to negotiate with Democrats. Those talks are to resume early next week.

Schumer said Democrats won't back down in their push to persuade Bush to change U.S. policy in Iraq so American troops can get out of the business of policing a civil war between Sunnis and Shiites.

"I know how strongly the president feels that he is right, but if he looked at the facts on the ground, he would come to the conclusion that most Americans have - we need a change in direction," Schumer said.

Bush urged Congress to give the new war strategy he announced in January a chance to work. He said that while Republicans and Democrats will not always agree on the war, the consequences of failure in Iraq are clear.

"If we were to leave Iraq before the government can defend itself, there would be a security vacuum in the country," Bush warned. "Extremists from all factions could compete to fill that vacuum, causing sectarian killing to multiply on a horrific scale."

Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, is leading the military buildup of 21,500 more U.S. troops in Iraq. The administration hopes the extra security provided by the troops in Baghdad and Anbar Province will give the Iraqis time to mend sectarian fractures within the government and resolve other reconciliation issues.

Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, on a trip to Baghdad with other lawmakers, said she is not convinced that the Iraqi leaders have a sense of urgency about achieving political reconciliation. She said she told Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, head of the country's most powerful Shiite political party, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, that the Iraqi parliament should refrain from taking a recess this summer.

"As we are doing the military surge, we should have a political surge by the government," Snowe said on a conference call with reporters.

"They (U.S. troops) should not be on the front lines while the parliament is at recess for two months," she said.

The Constitution, Article I, Section 8:

The Congress shall have power ... to pay the debts and provide for the common defense ... of the United States...;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
...
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

[and] To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces....

Section 9.
...
No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.

The Treasury Department cannot issue “military defense bonds” or any other debt borrowed on the credit of the United States unless the Congress first authorizes it. Even if the Treasury did issue such bonds, the Congress would have to pass a law appropriating those funds to the common defense before the Army could draw them from the Treasury. Any alternative funding mechanism must meet constitutional muster and therefore must not enter into the federal Treasury at any time.

Unless the Congress has passed a law prohibiting it, private individuals for example could give money, civilian weaponry, rations, fuel, vehicles, and supplies directly to individual troops, perhaps coordinated by a non-tax-exempt corporation to ensure equitable distribution. Even then, only the Congress can raise and support armies.

Until the expiry of this Congress, the military must act under the expectation of zero additional appropriations and consequently must make extremely limited and judicious use of the limited resources at its disposal, cognizant of the potential for other enemies of the United States to make war against us because of the weakness and depletion of our arsenals.

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.