|
House votes to fund Iraq war in installments |
|
By Mike Soraghan
|
|
Posted: 05/10/07 08:59 PM [ET] |
The House Thursday night, by a vote of 221-205, passed a plan to give President Bush money for the Iraq war in two installments after rejecting a plan to withdraw all troops in nine months.
The votes came on the same day that President Bush indicated he’s willing to compromise with Democrats on setting “benchmarks” on progress in Iraq.
But Bush has indicated he will veto the House’s latest plan for funding the Iraq war. The spending bill now goes to the Senate, where both Democrats and Republicans have been cool to the two-tiered spending plan.
Any differences in the House and Senate versions would be worked out by a joint conference committee. Democratic leaders have said they want to send Bush a bill before Congress’s Memorial May break that starts May 24.
The spending bill passed despite 10 Democrats voting against it. Two Republicans, Reps. Walter Jones (N.C.) and Wayne Gilchrest (Md.) supported the measure. Seven members did not vote. Leaders of the House Out-of-Iraq caucus voted against the bill even after they got a vote on the full withdrawal bill.
But Democratic leaders did pick up several votes from both conservative and liberal wings of the party, and the vote contained little of the drama of the vote on the Democrats’ first Iraq supplemental last month. Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.) who has voted “present” on previous supplemental votes this time voted “no.”
“We owe it to the American people to find common ground to end this war,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) “But we will stand our ground against a blank check for a war without end.”
Republicans said the bill is an attempt by politicians to micromanage the war.
“This bill is designed to bring failure. Failure in Iraq means chaos in Iraq,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio).
Jones and Gilchrest had also voted with the Democrats on previous supplementals intended to change course in Iraq. Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.), who had voted “present” in a previous vote, voted “no.”
The spending plan was divided into two bills, a war bill and an agricultural relief bill. Democratic leaders have said the two bills could be put back together later in the legislative process.
The war spending bill would dole out the money in two installments. The first installment, available immediately on passage, would be $30 billion for war operations and $12 billion for other matters like military health care and training of Iraqi and Afghan troops.
But Democratic leaders want to withhold a second pot of $53 billion until Bush submits a report to Congress on July 13 regarding progress in Iraq. That would trigger two votes 10 days later on whether to continue with war spending without strings, or whether to begin an immediate withdrawal of troops.
The agriculture bill was to be voted on later Thursday night.
The bill to withdraw from Iraq in nine months was rejected 171-255, but its sponsor Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said he got more votes than he expected.
“This is proof the U.S. Congress is catching up to where the American people are,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.). He also said the vote could give House negotiators like House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) more leverage as they negotiate a bill to send the White House.
Pelosi voted for the McGovern bill. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) voted against it. A Hoyer spokeswoman said the majority leader waited until the end to vote on the measure in order to avoid influencing votes. She added that Hoyer believes benchmarks and reports from the administration are necessary.
Bush earlier in the day seemed to soften his stance on benchmarks.
“One message I have heard from people from both parties is that the idea of benchmarks makes sense. And I agree,” Bush said in a news conference at the Pentagon. “It makes sense to have benchmarks as a part of our discussion on how to go forward.”
That drew praise from a key Democrat.
“He’s come off the pedestal and begun to realize we need to change the direction of this country,” praised Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.). |
