The House is likely to pass legislation this year setting a target date for the withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq, according to the leader of the House Democrats’ campaign arm.

“I would expect the House to pass legislation similar to that which we passed in the past … a date for the redeployment of the majority of U.S. combat forces,” Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said in an interview with The Hill Monday.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has said Democrats’ inability to force President Bush to change course on Iraq has been her greatest disappointment.

The decision on whether to include withdrawal language belongs to Pelosi and others such as House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) and House Appropriations Defense subcommittee Chairman John Murtha (D-Pa.). Democratic aides stressed Monday that no decision has been made.

But Van Hollen is responsible for handling the political fallout of whatever decision is made. And he is part of the leadership team that will be weighing the decision.

“There are some people who would say, ‘OK, why are you going through this exercise again, if the president is going to veto this?’ We have a responsibility to do everything we can to follow through on the changes we say we want made,” Van Hollen said. “I think it is a question of demonstrating where you stand, and what you will do, and continue to push to do, if you are elected in November.”

Republicans in Congress have criticized any congressional effort to force withdrawal from Iraq, saying it amounts to micromanaging the war.

“It would be a shame if Democratic leaders insist on recycling their stale talking points and failed strategy from last year rather than responding to the facts on the ground, including the security improvements that their own members have seen in Iraq,” said Michael Steel, spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio).

If the supplemental does include a withdrawal date, it will require a substantial effort by Democratic leaders to hold the caucus together in the face of staunch Republican opposition. It would probably stall in the Senate, and even if it didn’t, Bush would veto it.

A so-called “clean” supplemental with no attempt to change Iraq policy and no outside spending might pass quickly with support from unified House Republicans and conservative Democrats. But that would anger the Democrats’ large and vocal left wing.

Last year, Democrats did both — passing spending bills that included and excluded withdrawal language. They spent weeks building Democratic support for the first bill, which called for full withdrawal by August 2008. Pelosi and her fellow leaders had to balance liberals who felt the bill didn’t go far enough with conservatives who felt it went too far in telling Bush how to run the war. It passed narrowly in March, 218-212.

When Bush vetoed that, the House adopted a bill in May that essentially gave the president everything he asked for. Many members of the Out-of-Iraq Caucus voted no, as did Pelosi herself.

After that, the security situation in Iraq began to improve as the military aspects of Bush’s “surge” troop escalation took hold. But in recent weeks, violence has begun to increase, and even Republicans appear worried that the U.S. is pouring too much money into Iraq while the Iraqi government contributes little of its oil revenue to reconstruction.

Bush has requested $108 billion this year for the Iraq supplemental. Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, has asked that the money be provided by June.

There have been discussions about splitting the supplemental into two bills, one for Iraq and the other for Afghanistan. Congressional leaders have also considered adding domestic spending, such as a “second stimulus” plan, and veterans’ legislation to the bill, or bills.

But no decisions have been made. The House Appropriations Committee has held hearings concerning Iraq, but the committee has held no votes on the supplemental spending legislation.