Go to Original
Democrats Set to Defy Bush on War Bill
By Carl Hulse
The New York Times
Tuesday 06 May 2008
Washington - Defying President Bush, House Democrats are preparing to
forge ahead with a war spending measure that would include extended unemployment
assistance and new educational benefits for returning veterans.
After a meeting Monday evening of House Democratic leaders, Speaker Nancy Pelosi
said she hoped to bring a $178 billion measure to the floor this week. What
could be a contentious debate on the matter is likely to be held on Thursday,
aides said.
Ms. Pelosi, of California, did not disclose details of the proposed bill, which
will be presented to rank-and-file Democrats at a closed party session on Tuesday.
But Democratic officials, who did not want to be identified since the bill was
still being put into final form, said the legislative package would include
provisions requiring a significant withdrawal of troops from Iraq by December
2009 and measures that would force Iraq to share more costs of its reconstruction.
Democrats also intend to make veterans eligible for new educational assistance
if they have served from three months to three years or more on active duty
since Sept. 11, 2001. The aid would be equivalent to a four-year scholarship
at a public university for those with three years or more service, with payments
prorated for those with less time.
Mr. Bush has steadily insisted he would not approve any legislation that exceeds
his spending request for the war, sets any withdrawal deadlines or adds domestic
money he opposes like the unemployment benefits. And House Republicans, angry
that the measure is not going through formal committee consideration, began
on Monday to open procedural attacks on the House floor in protest, forcing
extra votes on noncontroversial measures.
"The Democrat leaders of the House and Senate are attempting to jam
a 200-plus-billion-dollar spending bill through the Congress with absolutely
no oversight or scrutiny by a vast majority of members, senators or their constituents,"
Representative Jerry Lewis of California, the senior Republican on the Appropriations
Committee, said in a statement on Monday. "Never in my 30 years in Congress
has there been such an abuse of the processes and rules of the House."
Democrats said privately that they expected the provisions setting a withdrawal
deadline and putting other conditions on the war money to be eliminated by the
Senate before a final House vote later this spring.
The Democratic strategy is to try to hold the underlying measure close to Mr.
Bush's bottom line number - $108 billion in Pentagon money for
the current year, $70 billion through the first months of 2009 - and
essentially dare him to veto it over added veterans spending and the unemployment
aid.
Democrats say that they believe Republicans will be reluctant to oppose the
expanded veterans money in an election year and that the cost is relatively
small in the first year, though it would expand quickly and significantly in
subsequent years. Republicans in both the House and Senate have been assembling
alternatives to the Democratic veterans plan, which has some bipartisan support.
Mr. Bush said last week that he was willing to consider more help for veterans
but wanted to do it separately from the war financing measure.
The House provisions calling for a withdrawal from Iraq would also include
a ban on torture of terrorism detainees, a prohibition on permanent bases in
Iraq and new readiness requirements for troops, including more time at home
between deployments.
Given the looming election and the stalemate last year over federal spending,
many lawmakers see the must-pass war spending bill as the lone spending measure
likely to become law this year, increasing the incentive to add money and policy
measures to it. Senators of both parties have indicated that they might use
the war legislation as a vehicle to push their own priorities.
-------
Jump to today's Truthout Features:
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.
Print This Story
E-mail This Story