http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070516/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq&printer=1;_ylt=AmO5ng2agxsqO5fLYm11.QmMwfIE
Senate Dems fail to cut off war funds
By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent
Anti-war Democrats in the Senate failed in an attempt to cut off funds for
the Iraq war on Wednesday, a lopsided bipartisan vote that masked growing
impatience within both political parties over President Bush's handling of
the four-year conflict.
The 67-29 vote against the Democrats' measure left it far short of the 60
needed to advance. But more than half the Senate's Democrats sup****ted the
move, a marked change from last summer when only a dozen members of the
rank
and file backed a troop withdrawal deadline.
"It was considered absolute heresy four months ago" to stop the war, said
Sen. Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, author of the measure to cut off funds
for most military operations after March 31, 2008. Nowhere was the ****ft
more evident than among the Senate's Democratic presidential contenders.
For the first time, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Barack Obama
(news, bio, voting record) of Illinois and Joe Biden of Delaware joined
Sen.
Chris Dodd in lending sup****t to the notion of setting a date to end U.S.
participation in the war.
Among them, only Clinton stressed the procedural nature of her vote,
declining to say she would ultimately vote to cut off funding if given a
chance. "I'm not going to speculate on what I'll be voting on in the
future," she told re****ters, although her spokesman, Philippe Reines, said
flatly that the New York lawmaker sup****ts the legislation.
Other Democrats were unmistakably clear.
"How many more soldiers do we have to bury? How many more do we have to
bring into our military and veterans hospitals? How many more thousands of
innocent Iraqis have to die before we finally accept our responsibility to
bring this war to an end?" asked Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois.
Republicans voted unanimously against the measure, and several judged it
harshly. Sen. Mitch McConnell (news, bio, voting record) of Kentucky, the
GOP leader, said it fixed a "surrender date" for the United States.
There were 28 Democrats in favor of advancing the bill, and 19 opposed.
"An arbitrary cutoff date would take away an im****tant negotiating tool,"
said Sen. Jim Webb, of Virginia, a Democratic critic of the war elected to
his first term last November. He noted that the administration had
recently
taken steps to engage Iran in diplomacy in hopes of easing the sectarian
violence in neighboring Iraq.
The vote occurred as Congress pursued multiple objectives in connection
with
a war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,400 U.S. troops.
Congressional leaders hope to send Bush legislation by the end of next
week
providing more than $90 billion to pay for the war through Sept. 30, the
end
of the fiscal year, and at least part of the reason for the day's events
was
to give lawmakers an outlet for their unhappiness.
Several Republicans, led by Sen. John Warner (news, bio, voting record) of
Virginia, proposed legislation that threatened a reduction in
reconstruction
funds if the Iraqi government fails to make progress toward a series of
military and political goals, and provides for outside experts to re****t
to
lawmakers on the subject.
"The Iraqi government, it strikes me, needs to understand that they're
running out of time to get their part of the job done," said McConnell.
But the same proposal would have given Bush authority to waive the
requirement for Iraqi progress, and it drew objections from Democrats as a
result.
"It's is really very tepid, very weak," said Senate Majority Leader Harry
Reid (news, bio, voting record).
In the end, the vote was 52-44, more than a majority but less than the 60
needed to advance under the rules in effect.
While Feingold's attempt to cut off funds is likely to recede into the
background, at least for the time being, the suggestion that the Iraqis be
held to account for their promises to foster democracy and strengthen
their
own military has wide currency within Congress.
"We have to make certain that (troops) do receive the funds that they
need,"
said Durbin, D-Ill. "But we need to do it in the context of changing this
policy. And I think our votes today are an indication that that sentiment
is
growing."
Bush, too, has said he is willing to accept so-called benchmarks within
legislation that provides the funds the Pentagon needs, although so far,
he
has not agreed to enforcement measures that might reduce reconstruction
funds ticketed for Iraq.
That is one of the issues that is likely to surface - if it hasn't already
-
in secretive talks that Reid and McConnell have held in recent days with
White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten in hopes of forging a compromise
war
funding bill.
Warner's measure also said the United States should begin a withdrawal if
the Iraqi government requests one, another idea that is quietly gaining
sup****t in Congress.
At the White House, deputy press secretary Dana Perino said: "The U.N.
Security Council resolution, which provides the present basis for
coalition
forces in Iraq, has always been subject to termination by the Iraqi
government. So this is nothing new."
There is relatively little controversy over the amount of money to be
provided for the Pentagon, but Bush and congressional Republicans object
to
billions of dollars in domestic spending that Democrats favor.
Of less concern to the White House is a Democratic attempt to add a
minimum
wage increase to the measure. It calls for three increases of 70 cents an
hour over the next two years, and would provide the first raise in more
than
a decade in the federal wage floor.
The debate over Iraq has dominated the work of the Democratic-controlled
Congress this year, and in recent weeks, Republicans, too, have begun to
show their impatience with the war.
A group of 11 moderate House Republicans met with Bush and several top
advisers at the White House recently, bluntly telling him that the party's
political prospects in 2008 were in jeopardy as a result of the war.
Several GOP lawmakers in both houses have said they are looking for a
significant change in the war by September, signaling they could part
company with the president as the 2008 election year draws close.
|
