Posted on 11/06/2007 5:35:04 PM PST by mdittmar
Four powerful lawmakers are working on a new Iraq plan for the Democratic Congress in the hope it will reignite the war debate as soon as this week.
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) said the new legislation might include interim “bridge funds” providing partial military funding for the Iraq war as well as a mandate to change the mission of the U.S. military to counterterrorism and other operations. He also said it could include a goal of completing a troop withdrawal within nine months.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) says the basis of the plan is identical to previous bills moved by the Democratic majority, such as the withdrawal plan that the House passed in July and the war supplemental that President Bush vetoed in May.
“It will resemble what we have done before,” Pelosi said at a press conference today. “‘The same’ is pretty different than what the president wants.”
In an interview, Hoyer quipped, “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.”
Democrats hope they will win GOP support for ending the war by tying restrictions to funding, and by switching a mandate for withdrawing troops with a less stringent goal for withdrawal. Language to require a nine-month withdrawal was included in an amendment previously offered by Sens. Carl Levin (Mich.) and Jack Reed (R.I.), but it was rejected by a 47-47 vote in September.
In addition, if Democrats come up short in their latest attempt to influence Iraq policy, it will allow them to blame Republicans for again blocking a change in the course of the unpopular war as they head home for the two-week recess.
The strategy is risky, however, since it would also allow Republicans to argue that Democrats are stalling progress on a host of legislative matters as they pursue Iraq policies that are sure to fall short of the 60 needed to break a filibuster, much less the two-thirds majority needed in both chambers to override a presidential veto.
Levin, who participated in lengthy leadership negotiations over Iraq policy last week, said he didn’t want to announce what his party’s leadership is planning to unveil, but said there has been “an approach that has been basically agreed upon.”
He said the package may include interim bridge funds “with certain strings attached,” as well as a softer version of the defeated Levin-Reed amendment.
Levin said Congress would take up another bridge fund at a later time, which likely signals that Democrats are in no hurry to act on President Bush’s nearly $200 billion fiscal 2008 war supplemental funding request.
Democratic leaders are not seeking input from the most avidly anti-war legislators in the Out of Iraq caucus, where lawmakers are growing frustrated with inaction on Iraq.
“I’m frustrated that while we drift, our troops are being killed and injured,” said Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), a co-founder of the Out of Iraq caucus.
Pelosi acknowledged the frustration Tuesday, saying, “If there’s anything I’ve been disappointed in, it’s been that failure” to end the war. Asked why she doesn’t end the war on her own, she said, “Would that I had that power.”
Reed said he expected the approach to be resolved in the “next couple of days. . . . It’s not like we can put these decisions off any longer.”
Speaking with reporters after Tuesday’s Democratic policy luncheon, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) punted when asked about his plans to take up a bridge fund.
“Before we get any bridge fund, we have to talk about what we’re going to do this week,” Reid said, pointing to the current farm bill on the floor and plans to take up a massive bill that would fund the departments of Veterans Affairs, Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education.
Reid said the Senate will soon tackle an appropriations bill for the Defense Department, which includes a continuing resolution to keep the government operating through Dec. 14. That bill is silent on Iraq-withdrawal language, making the bridge fund for Iraq the next likely vehicle for a debate over the war.
When asked if the Senate would debate Iraq before Thanksgiving, Reid said: “We’ll have to see.”
love post 16! LOL
lol
Sort of risky though.
The president could always kill the bill with a veto.
Defunding the troops doesn't go to the President's desk.
They just never give up do they.. I am waiting to see how they take the credit for the successes in Iraq.
the first time you’ve run into a drawing of a road on the side of a rock, after someone has just gone through it... it becomes personal.
then, no amount of money is too much to silence that little beeper...
teeman
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.