Groping For Agreement
Democrats and Republicans began the process of reaching a compromise on funding the military operations in Iraq yesterday, with Democrats apparently making the first big concession. The Washington Post reports that the demand for withdrawal timelines will be dropped -- and in return, the Republicans will back benchmarks tied to non-military aid for Iraq:
President Bush and congressional leaders began negotiating a second war funding bill yesterday, with Democrats offering the first major concession: an agreement to drop their demand for a timeline to bring troops home from Iraq.Democrats backed off after the House failed, on a vote of 222 to 203, to override the president's veto of a $124 billion measure that would have required U.S. forces to begin withdrawing as early as July. But party leaders made it clear that the next bill will have to include language that influences war policy. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) outlined a second measure that would step up Iraqi accountability, "transition" the U.S. military role and show "a reasonable way to end this war." ...
But a new dynamic also is at work, with some Republicans now saying that funding further military operations in Iraq with no strings attached does not make practical or political sense. Rep. Bob Inglis (S.C.), a conservative who opposed the first funding bill, said, "The hallway talk is very different from the podium talk."
While deadlines for troop withdrawals had to be dropped from the spending bill, such language is likely to appear in a defense policy measure that is expected to reach the House floor in two weeks, just when a second war funding bill could be ready for a House vote. Democrats want the next spending measure to pass before Congress recesses on May 25 for Memorial Day weekend.
The outline for this compromise could have been seen for weeks. After unanimously confirming General David Petraeus in what obviously portended a significant shift of strategy and tactics, Congress should have allowed at least six months before assessing the impact of his efforts. Instead, they decided to push for the political victory and attempted to force President Bush to back down -- and they failed to budge him. They also wasted a lot of time doing so, almost 90 days after the White House asked for the necessary funds for Petraeus and our military operations.
That puts Congress on the defensive. After laughably failing to override the veto yesterday -- a foregone conclusion for months -- they now have to start over again, 90 days later, while the Pentagon has already run out of money for some of its operations. The supplemental has to get passed and signed as quickly as possible, and that reduces the leverage of Congressional leadership. If they fail to produce an acceptable compromise bill by the time they leave for Memorial Day, the outrage will get directed at Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. The nation will wonder what they have been doing since the beginning of the year, since nothing much else has passed Congress since the Democrats took control in January.
Had the Democrats really wanted to put Bush in a corner, they would have started out with this compromise from the beginning. They could have garnered Republican support and taken leadership of the direction of the war. As the Post reports, many Republicans have deep concerns about the Iraqi government and the pace of reform. They do not want to give Nouri al-Maliki a blank check, either. That kind of politicking would have given momentum and a sense of reality to the Democrats.
Instead, they decided to get into a pissing match, and deliberately rejected reasonable compromises for extremism. They lost the sympathy of all but four Republicans in Congress; the rest will not vote to surrender to terrorists by naming dates for our retreat. Reid and Pelosi enabled Bush to look tough, presidential, and relevant -- and now they have belatedly discovered that since they don't have the testicular fortitude to yank the funding altogether, they have to find some way to accommodate the White House.
Welcome to the big leagues, Harry and Nancy. This time, try to keep up.
Posted by Ed Morrissey on May 3, 2007 6:59 AM | Comments (11) | TrackBacks (5)
Comments (11)
Posted by Doc Neaves![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/nav-commenters.gif)
| May 3, 2007 7:30 AM
Any meddling by congress (R or D) should be roundly excoriated in public and vetoed by the President, lest he set precedent allowing Congress to control the war. This power is reserved to the President and the President alone. Any deviaiton from this will be a constitutional crisis, one that we will fight for a hundred years and never correct.
Posted by Robert![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/nav-commenters.gif)
| May 3, 2007 8:26 AM
The Democratic meltdown was mostly about internal Dem party squabbling with an eye to appeasing the nutroots in preparation for the '08 campaign. The Dems know their nutroots will never let them stop pounding on Bush even if they get pounded back ten times as hard. Good!
Posted by NoDonkey![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/nav-commenters.gif)
| May 3, 2007 8:29 AM
By Memorial Day? What have these Democrat clowns been doing?
They knew this worthless bill they threw together at the last minute was going to get vetoed. Where's their "Plan B"?
Congressional Democrats - They get an "A+" in incompetence, A+ in corruption and A+ in undermining the US military.
But the Dems get an F- in writing/passing legislation, which is what they get paid to do.
Who elected these people? What in god's name were they thinking? Or drinking?
Posted by burt![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/nav-commenters.gif)
| May 3, 2007 10:16 AM
Reid and Pelosi are winning big. They are getting everything they wanted: all the pork they can swallow and a big increase in the minimum wage. The rest was just preamble.
Posted by The Yell![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/nav-commenters.gif)
| May 3, 2007 10:17 AM
I'm with Doc Neaves. Congressional Republicans aren't showing commitment to victory. They are caving.
Posted by unclesmrgol![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/nav-commenters.gif)
| May 3, 2007 10:55 AM
Groping for agreement? Who did the Dems do it to this time -- Olympia Snow?
Posted by Gary Gross![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/nav-commenters.gif)
| May 3, 2007 12:31 PM
The real negotiations have started. As for the civil war inside the Democratic Party, that's all that's all Soros' fault.
He seized control of the party in a BCRA world.
Posted by docjim505![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/nav-commenters.gif)
| May 3, 2007 2:20 PM
Democrats backed off after the House failed, on a vote of 222 to 203, to override the president's veto of a $124 billion measure that would have required U.S. forces to begin withdrawing as early as July. But party leaders made it clear that the next bill will have to include language that influences war policy. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) outlined a second measure that would step up Iraqi accountability, "transition" the U.S. military role and show "a reasonable way to end this war."
Oh, I think they Congress is already influencing war policy. The terrorists' war policy, that is. al Qaeda, Mookie, and the other terrorists in Iraq have got us on the ropes and know that, given a few more car bombings, a few hundred more dead US soldiers, and a few more outrages in Baghdad, we'll cut 'n' run. Thanks, democrats: you're winning the war... for the other side.
Does anybody but me see the sickening double standard in Grand Admiral Reid and Commissar Pelosi setting military policy after years of listening to the dems yap about Bush's lack of military experience?
As for the Republicans in Congress... I've come to expect nothing from them. While they aren't quite the Benedict Arnolds that the filthy dems have become, they are a pack of passive, spineless pansies who seem to think that getting along with Reid, Pelosi, and their filthy gang of traitors is the most important thing. Let's call it preparation for "demmitude": subservience to a dem majority.
"Senator Reid... Excuse me, Master Reid, can I have a few million for pork in my state? Remember, I've always been your loyal lackey whenever you needed a Republican for 'bipartisanship'."
I'm very, very angry right now. The country's being sold out by elected members of Congress who are openly exulting about stabbing our troops in the back.
Posted by TheConfusedOne![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/nav-commenters.gif)
| May 3, 2007 2:55 PM
The thing that amazes me is that the Congress that has so far consumed 3 months in trying to pass this appropriate expect Iraq to get their entire political house in order in 6 months.
Posted by jpe![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/nav-commenters.gif)
| May 3, 2007 3:53 PM
Yes, a Friedman Unit is always about the right time to wait.
*rolls eyes*
Posted by ohmyachingback![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/nav-commenters.gif)
| May 3, 2007 6:42 PM
What we are seeing is Murtha's "slow bleed". What a despicable bunch of fools these Dems be.