WASHINGTON, Feb. 22 — Senior Senate Democrats, stepping up their confrontation with President Bush over Iraq policy, are preparing legislation that would limit the role of United States troops there to counterterrorism efforts and prohibit them from interceding in sectarian violence.
Senate officials said Thursday that the proposal now being drafted would be a new turn in their attempts to force the White House to halt its troop buildup in Baghdad. They described it as more substantive than the nonbinding resolution of opposition to the increase that stalled in the Senate last Saturday.
The officials would speak only if not identified because the central proposal was still being drafted and needs to be presented to all Senate Democrats when they return from a weeklong recess next Tuesday.
They said the proposal was intended to essentially overturn the 2002 resolution granting Mr. Bush the authority to remove Saddam Hussein from power, and limit the military to combating Al Qaeda in Iraq, keeping Iraq from becoming a haven for terrorists and training Iraqi forces. The proposal’s goal, officials said, would be to allow combat forces not engaged in those duties to be removed from Iraq next year.
The chief authors are Senators Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and Carl Levin of Michigan, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee. The plan is to try to attach the proposal to an antiterrorism bill the Senate expects to begin considering Tuesday.
Lawmakers and senior aides said that such a plan was unlikely to pass Congress, and even if it did, it would certainly be vetoed by President Bush. But Democrats say their intention is to keep pressure on both Mr. Bush and Congressional Republicans who are facing a public frustrated with the war. Democrats say that other Iraq proposals are likely to emerge as well.
A couple of comments here. First, there is no way for the Democrats to pass any resolution or bill to limit the Bush administration's troop surge, cap war funding, or initiate a troop withdrawal. The Senate is too closely divided between the Democrats and Republicans. Furthermore, any bill or resolution that even passes the Senate will certainly face a presidential veto. Bush will still get what he wants on Iraq for the next two years.
The key here is that the Senate Democrats are now defining the Republican position on Iraq. In drafting these resolutions and bills, they are forcing Senate Republicans to take a position of either supporting the Bush administration's policies on Iraq, or facing a possible voter wrath in November 2008. The Senate Democrats tried to push two non-binding resolutions through the Senate, but they were both blocked by Republican filibusters. This is not a failure of the Senate Democrats, but rather it is the result of Republican delaying tactics. Now the Democrats are going to start introducing legislation with some teeth in it. This new round of legislation is to overturn the 2002 resolution authorizing President Bush to use military force to depose Saddam Hussein. This resolution will not pass the Senate, but it will force Republicans to again choose sides between the president's war escalation--especially if Bush does decide to attack Iran--and the American publics desire to get out of Iraq. This is all about positioning for the 2008 elections.
The Washington Post has an interesting detail regarding this latest Democratic legislation:
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) began calling for a reauthorization of the war early last month and raised it again last week, during a gathering in the office of Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.). Participants included Kerry, Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl M. Levin (Mich.), Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), Jack Reed (R.I.) and Russell Feingold (Wis.). Those Democratic senators have emerged as an unofficial war council representing the caucus's wide range of views.
"We gave the president that power to destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and, if necessary, to depose Saddam Hussein," Biden said of the 2002 resolution in a speech last week before the Brookings Institution. "The WMD was not there. Saddam Hussein is no longer there. The 2002 authorization is no longer relevant to the situation in Iraq."
Biden and Levin are drafting language to present to their colleagues when the Senate reconvenes on Tuesday, following a week-long recess.
The new framework would set a goal for withdrawing combat brigades by March 31, 2008, the same timetable established by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. Once the combat phase ends, troops would be restricted to assisting Iraqis with training, border security and counterterrorism.
The Senate Democrats are now adopting the Iraq Study Group proposals for withdrawing troops from Iraq. The American public has already shown that they support the Iraq Study Group's recommendations over that of President Bush. By linking this latest legislation with the Iraq Study Group recommendations, the Senate Democrats are again forcing the Republicans into a bad choice of either supporting President Bush's war escalation--and Bush's own snubbing of the ISG report--or supporting the will of the American people. This will all go into record, which can then be used against the Republicans in 2008.
The Democrats are doing what they have to do--hold the Republicans feet to the fire on Iraq and increase the pressure.
2 comments:
I hope like hell they do SOMETHING, Eric. Last night I was treated to the unsettling news that insurgents in Iraq have finally got their hands on chemical weaponry. I knew it was only a matter of time - and I’m very upset at its being used on anyone - not just American soldiers; but right now America does not seem able to affect that situation one way or the other – its time to get the hell out. Iraq is lost - to everyone. What will eventually emerge will much more closely resemble Iran than Jordan, I think. Right now all I want is our people safely home - before some violence addicted terrorist sprays chlorine gas all over them. So Congress had better act. Soon. I'd also really appreciate it if the Democratic Party would tirelessly push for open debate on what to do about the Iraqi mess. I want to hear everyone's ideas. Then choose an effective one and get moving! Time has run out. We are literally under the gun here. Maybe we should put Anna Nicole circus master Judge Larry Seidlin in charge. He could blow past everyone's objections and force them all into a group hug.
By the way – I grew up in San Jose. I know all of it like the back of my hand!
Fat Lady: Thank you for your comment. The problem with the Democrats in the Senate is that they can't push too hard on getting out of Iraq. First, they don't have the votes to pass any legislation requiring troop withdrawals, caps, or funding restrictions. The Senate is so closely divided that the Democrats are going to need to pick off 11 Republicans to not only pass the legislation, but to pass it over a presidential veto. Second is that the Democrats can't just start demanding cuts in war funding. I've posted a number of polls here that really show the American public is still pretty much split on whether to impose caps on troop increases or funding--right now the polls are showing a slight majority of Americans approving such caps, but it is still pretty even. The Democrats can't push too hard yet--otherwise the Republicans will counter with their argument that the Dems don't support the troops and want the U.S. to lose the war. Yes, I know that the Republicans are going to use that argument against the Dems anyways. But for now, the public is starting to come around on the Democratic side for the imposition of these stronger measures--the last thing the Dems need is to have the GOP derail the publics' support for these measures. So the Dems need to take it slow and steady with increasing the pressure on the Republicans here. Get the legislation passed revoking the president's war powers in Iraq. Then increase the pressure with troop caps, and finally cuts in war funding.
I know that there are a lot of liberals that want the troops out now. I want them out now as well. But the current political situation in Congress and the White House clearly shows that the troop withdrawal will not happen. I don't blame the Democrats on this--this is Republican delaying tactics. You are right that time is running out--but it is not running out on the Democratic side. It is running out on the Republican side here! As long as the war continues to go bad, and the Republicans continue goose-stepping to the White House demands, the American public is going to get angry at both the Bush administration and the Republicans. Once the public opinion polls start showing a strong and clear majority of Americans supporting both caps in war funding and withdrawals, then you can bet that the Democrats will start quickly introducing such legislation into both the House and Senate. President Bush's troop surge is underway now. It will be about six or seven months before we know if surge will be a success or failure. I figure in September or October that we'll start reading reports on both the failure of Bush's troop surge, and the Democratic introduction of such legislation on troop caps, and cuts in war funding. Also remember that we are going to see a lot of debate on Iraq and the 2008 elections. If the Republicans are still goose-stepping with the Bush White House at that time, then the GOP is in a world of trouble.
And Fat Lady....Do you know the way to San Jose? Couldn't resist the bad joke here. I actually live in a little town called Campbell, but Campbell is pretty much engulfed into San Jose. The area has really exploded in the past 20-30 years with all the high tech insanity. Still, it is nice to hear from someone who use to live in the San Jose area.
Post a Comment