House Dems Push Bill to End Iraq War

By ANNE FLAHERTY

WASHINGTON – Determined to end the war in Iraq, House Democrats advanced legislation Thursday setting a timetable for a U.S. troop withdrawal despite opposition from Republicans as well as a veto threat from the White House.

"I want this war to end. I don’t want to go to any more funerals," said New York Rep. Rep. Jose Serrano as the House Appropriations Committee debated the measure, expected to pass on a near party-line vote by day’s end.

Republicans accused Democrats of micro-managing the war, taking over a role best left to the generals. Rep. Hal Rogers of Kentucky accused Democrats of an "ill-advised and precipitous withdrawal" plan. And Rep. Roger Wicker of Miss., said the legislation was a back-door method of cutting off funds for the troops – a charge that the Democratic chairman, Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, swiftly disputed.

Obey and the Democratic leadership hoped for a final vote by late in the day on the measure, which includes $95.5 billion in funds for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Overall, the bill’s price tag was $124 billion, and included funds for Democratic domestic priorities such as health care for veterans and children.

The political landscape was different across the Capitol, where Republicans expressed confidence they had the votes to defeat an alternative approach advanced by Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Democrats.

Their proposal sets a goal of a troop withdrawal by March 31, 2008. A mid-afternoon vote was expected.

In the House, assembling the support needed to pass the withdrawal plan has become the first major test for the Democratic leadership that took office in January.

Aides and senior lawmakers have expressed confidence in recent days that they would succeed, both in the committee and on the House floor next week.

But prospects of the bill becoming law are dim. In addition to the White House veto threat and overwhelming GOP opposition to the bill, the legislation is unlikely to survive in the Senate, where Reid leads a thin majority and must confront Republicans adept at using arcane rules to thwart Democrats.

The Iraq debate spilled over to the 2008 campaign for the White House.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a Democratic presidential candidate, said in a New York Times interview that if elected she would maintain a scaled-down American military force in Iraq that would stay off the streets in Baghdad and no longer would try to protect Iraqis from sectarian violence.

She cited "remaining vital national security interests" for a continued deployment of U.S. troops in Iraq aimed at fighting al-Qaida, deterring Iran, protecting Kurds and possibly supporting the Iraqi military, the newspaper reported Wednesday night on its Web site.

She said her plan was consistent with the Senate resolution, saying it called for "a limited number" of troops to stay in Iraq to protect the U.S. Embassy and other personnel, train and equip Iraqi forces and conduct "targeted counterterrorism operations."

While the House bill is unlikely to sail through unchecked, Democrats say its passage – even if by a slim majority – would be a loud message to the president to end the war.

Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va., who had been skeptical of earlier drafts of the war spending bill, said he is now on board and believes Democratic defections will be few.

Pelosi was trying to line up votes from party liberals who want troops out of Iraq sooner than the 2008 deadline, as well as more conservative Democrats who are concerned the bill would micromanage the war.

Rep. Barbara Lee, a member of the Appropriations Committee, has not said whether she will vote in favor of the bill. As co-chair of the Progressive Caucus, Lee, D-Calif., supports an alternative proposal that would cut funding for all military operations.

In a statement Tuesday, Lee called the supplemental proposal a step forward.

"Still, too many of our troops are dying in an occupation that needs to end sooner rather than later, and I will continue to push for enforceable timelines and to protect our troops and to fully fund their safe and orderly withdrawal from Iraq at the earliest practicable date."

But other members of the Progressive Caucus said they would support the measure once it is on the floor.

A total of 10 peaceful anti-war protesters were arrested, both inside the committee room and outside the building where the debate was unfolding.

Sgt. Kimberly Schneider of the Capitol Police said they would be charged with unlawful assembly and disorderly conduct. "They were being loud and boisterous. They were told to stop and they didn’t so they were arrested," she said.