Skip to comments.
Sen. Levin hints at emerging Democratic strategy on Iraq
The Hill ^
| October 25, 2007
| Manu Raju
Posted on 10/24/2007 5:59:34 PM PDT by mdittmar
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) is working with a key appropriator on a strategy to halve the White Houses war-funding request to pressure President Bush into changing course in Iraq.
Levin said Wednesday that giving Bush a six-month installment plan on the nearly $200 billion fiscal 2008 war-funding request would serve a dual purpose: It would intensify pressure on the president to change course after next June, while avoiding sending a negative message to the troops, because war funding would continue until next may or June, when the president would have to request a second funding bill.
Levin, who is working with Appropriations Committee member Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), said the duo is talking with the panels other Democrats about including language in the supplemental that would target a complete withdrawal from Iraq in nine months.
Employing that approach could put the onus on Republican opponents to secure 60 votes on the Senate floor to strip the withdrawal language from the bill, Levin said. Some centrist Republicans have been open to the idea of a timetable for withdrawal, but have called for the goal to be 15 months.
The ideas are under serious consideration within the Democratic Conference, senators said Wednesday. Democrats are still finalizing strategy and, according to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Everything is on the table. The only thing that is not on the table is signing a blank check.
Having failed to significantly chip away at Republican opposition on bills to withdraw troops from Iraq, Democrats see the war supplemental as a ripe opportunity to force changes to Bushs war policy. Unlike during the fiscal 2007 supplemental debate, when Bush vetoed timetables with a hard deadline for troop withdrawals, Levin is urging his conference to take a softer approach in a bid to overcome a Senate filibuster and possibly a presidential veto.
In the House, key Democrats have suggested withholding the supplemental until Bush commits to changing course in Iraq. This would force funding to go through the regular budget process.
According to Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), who sits on the Appropriations Defense subcommittee, Levins plan differs on the particulars, but is consistent with the overall strategy that House appropriators are pursuing on Iraq.
Theres becoming a consensus on a partial bill that asserts the prerogative of the legislative branch, Moran said.
An administration official on Wednesday took a dim view of Levins strategy. This Congress has already failed to pass its annual appropriations bills, so it seems outlandish to think they could handle increasing their workload on the backs of our troops in harms way, said Sean Kevelighan, a spokesman for the White House budget office.
The supplemental debate presents tricky politics for Democrats, who could open themselves up to Republican attacks that they are limiting funds for troops in harms way.
Levin says his approach would allow Democrats to blunt those attacks.
We ought to
put that kind of pressure on the administration by taking a positive act, which is providing funding for the troops, and doing it for a period which requires revisiting this issue after the president reports to us next spring, Levin told reporters at a breakfast on Wednesday hosted by The Christian Science Monitor. Next March, Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, will report to Congress on the status of the war.
Levin added that he and Reed have not settled on a dollar figure for a six-month installment plan, saying he is trying to gauge the level of interest in his concept.
Forcing Bush to seek a second supplemental for fiscal 2008 would add a fresh dose of presidential politics to the debate with campaign season moving into high gear early next summer.
Anything we can do to constrain this president from pursuing his continued failed course is worth looking at, Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) said of Levins proposal.
Levins scenario would also lead to consideration of an Iraq supplemental at a time when House and Senate Republicans would be locked in tight reelection races and may be inclined to push for more restrictions on the war.
Its unlikely that there would be broad GOP support for slicing up Bushs plan. On Wednesday, both Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Appropriations Committee ranking Republican Thad Cochran (Miss.) would not divulge their thoughts on the matter.
We havent really discussed much of that yet, McConnell said.
Including a goal for withdrawal in the supplemental could attract some Republicans, but it would almost certainly generate strong opposition from the White House and GOP leaders.
To be defeated rather than succeed I think that would be a terrible idea, said Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.).
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who sits on the Appropriations Defense subcommittee, said Levins plan is not a bad idea at all.
Im now reaching the point where I believe controlling the supplemental is important, Feinstein said.
Mike Soraghan contributed to this story.
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 110th; carllevin; clinton; durbin; iraq; kennedy; kerry; mariacantwell; murtha; pattymurray; pelosi; reid
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
1
posted on
10/24/2007 5:59:36 PM PDT
by
mdittmar
To: mdittmar
New Dhimicrat Strategy on Iraq?
“This war is lost”
2
posted on
10/24/2007 6:04:13 PM PDT
by
padre35
(Conservative in Exile/ No more miller brewing products, pass it on/Is 3.3)
To: mdittmar
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again—these demoncrats are UN-American. UN-Patriotic. UN-Troop Supporting. UN-Godly.
UN-believable. >:-(
God help us all!
3
posted on
10/24/2007 6:05:39 PM PDT
by
pillut48
(CJ in TX --Soccer Mom and proud RUSH REPUBLICAN! WIN, FRED, WIN!!!)
To: mdittmar
Leaky Levin. Can’t keep a secret.
4
posted on
10/24/2007 6:07:22 PM PDT
by
Parmy
To: mdittmar
Appropriations are issued every fiscal year, not twice a year, so if the full amount requested is not present the President should veto the whole Defense Appropriations until it is there.
5
posted on
10/24/2007 6:07:53 PM PDT
by
tobyhill
(The media lies so much the truth is the exception)
To: mdittmar
Traitors.
Or incredibly stupid.
Or both.
Mostly the former.
6
posted on
10/24/2007 6:08:22 PM PDT
by
okie01
To: mdittmar; MurryMom
...target a complete withdrawal from Iraq in nine months.Cut off funding to the troops in an election year? BRILLIANT!
7
posted on
10/24/2007 6:10:50 PM PDT
by
Libloather
(That's just what I need - some two-bit, washed up, loser politician giving me weather forecasts...)
To: mdittmar
Four and a half years and they feel their first idea coming on. Talk about losers.
8
posted on
10/24/2007 6:12:12 PM PDT
by
cookcounty
(Murtha, World's Dumbest Marine Officer, --He can't find Okinawa on a map..)
To: mdittmar
Well, it is the Congress that controls the purse-strings.
That said ... the question is how will Congress allocate it. Vehicles without armor? No ammunition? No gas? Cut meals? Cut airlift?
Although it is Congress power to do so under the Constitution in the end it will bite them back.
9
posted on
10/24/2007 6:13:20 PM PDT
by
K-oneTexas
(I'm not a judge and there ain't enough of me to be a jury. (Zell Miller, A National Party No More))
To: pillut48
I personally hope they do it. It will make certain that the success in Iraq comes under fresh scrutiny in the middle of the presidential election.
10
posted on
10/24/2007 6:14:27 PM PDT
by
Tennessean4Bush
(An optimist believes we live in the best of all possible worlds. A pessimist fears this is true.)
To: Libloather
Withdrawal of US troops in 9 months =
1) Turkish slaughter of Kurds
2) The Shiite invasion of Iraq from Iran, under the guise of religious pilgrimage.
3) The funding of a Sunni guerrilla war against the Shia by the Saudi's
4) Nuclear war with Iran and the emerging Axis of China, N. Korea, Russia, Iran and Syria.
So lets just withdraw our troops, let the world go to hell in an ISlamofascist handbasket, and conmvert the USA tyo solar , wind, and alternative energy resources so we all can rid ebicycles to work. Yeah!
And forget that we will fight them as they come up Naragansett Bay.
Man those Dems are sooooo smart!
11
posted on
10/24/2007 6:17:22 PM PDT
by
Candor7
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Baghdad_(1258))
To: Tennessean4Bush
Good point.
Can’t wait to hear what Rush says about it.
I bet his take will be close to yours.
12
posted on
10/24/2007 6:19:53 PM PDT
by
dixiechick2000
(There ought to be one day-- just one-- when there is open season on senators. ~~ Will Rogers)
To: mdittmar
Democrats' plan for the war, in one sentence:
13
posted on
10/24/2007 6:21:54 PM PDT
by
G8 Diplomat
(Star Wars teaches us a foreboding lesson--evil emperors start out as Senators)
To: Parmy
“Leaky Levin. Cant keep a secret.”
Right, and the DEMS will fail again! They don’t dare cut funding and know they can’t get away with it if they really tried! Losers all!
To: mdittmar
The proper response is to cease depositing Government funds in Detroit acconts writing
15
posted on
10/24/2007 6:23:45 PM PDT
by
bert
(K.E. N.P. +12 . Moveon is not us...... Moveon is the enemy)
To: mdittmar
I’m from Michigan and I apologize for this turd.
16
posted on
10/24/2007 6:24:25 PM PDT
by
Rodm
(Seest thou a man diligent in his business? He shall stand before kings)
To: seekthetruth
Unfreaken believable....This crowd of dems are beyond LOSERS...Now that the war is going well, they want to promote defeat STILL! This may be the best strategy for the GOP to pick UP seats in the senate!
To: mdittmar
Run up the white flag again Nancy.
18
posted on
10/24/2007 6:45:29 PM PDT
by
ANGGAPO
(LayteGulfBeachClub)
To: Rodm
We all have turds in our states,it is up to us to flush them;)
19
posted on
10/24/2007 6:51:04 PM PDT
by
mdittmar
(May God watch over those who serve,and have served,to keep us free)
To: Rodm
Guys, relax. They are cutting their own throats. They are incrementally funding victory and victory is unfolding — and that victory will destroy them in about 9 months.
When the Iraqi government is asking for a permanent US base and offering to pay for it, the Democrats might very well lose the Senate as well as the WH.
It’s all about funding victory. Get the money to flow. As long as Petraeus has time to put victory into place, this century will belong to the US.
20
posted on
10/24/2007 6:52:21 PM PDT
by
Owen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson