Dem Iraq Funding Bill Is Most Aggressive Pursued Thus Far

House Democratic leaders are slated to introduce the toughest-worded war funding resolution since taking office, one that would appropriate money only for a drawdown of troops from Iraq, according to a copy obtained by the Huffington Post. As a sign of cohesion within the party, moreover, Senate Democrats are likely to follow suit with virtually identical legislation.

But neither measure is expected to overcome a veto from the President or even a filibuster from the Republican minority. And Congress will more than likely have to resume Iraq legislative battles early next year.

"[Leadership] is committed to pushing this as far as it can go," said one Democratic aide. "But it will get filibustered or vetoed. Regardless, this will be the last funding bill in 2007."

The emergency Defense Department appropriations bill is set to be introduced to the House on Wednesday. A draft obtained by the Huffington Post reads: "Within 30 days after enactment of this Act, the President shall commence an immediate and orderly redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq." Additionally, the draft states, "It is the sense of Congress that the war in Iraq should end as safely and quickly as possible and that our troops should be brought home."

The legislation would also require President Bush to provide Congress with a plan to complete the redeployment by December 15, 2008. It would prohibit deployment of forces to Iraq who are not fully trained, and change the strategy of U.S. forces in Iraq to diplomatic missions, force protection, and counterterrorism operations.

Finally, the supplemental language reaffirms that they won't be considering any additional war funding beyond this bill until early next year

"The amounts appropriated by this Act are sufficient to fully meet the immediate needs of the United States Armed Forces deployed to Iraq," the legislation concludes. "Congressional action on additional funding shall be deferred until [February 1, 2008]."

Comments

[nice2blucky]

This is my message to Congressional Democrats.

Looking good. You're in the right direction.
.

However, in that, you should be in the right direction regardless, forgive me for not celebrating in the streets so early in the legislative process. It's just another inkling of something that might be, a hint of character -- the kind that compels one to act decisively, by virtue.

And in that, Congressional Democrats should recognize -- know with absolute certainty -- that any proposal or threat by this Bush administration, is not now, nor has it ever been, "in good faith;" only time will tell whether these are simple maneuverings of the perennial loser, or true belief and understanding.

And again, forgive my skepticism about your motives. But election season is oh so near.

And again, I don't mean to seem too ungrateful, but don't expect me to be forgiving on Election Day simply because you flailed vigorously until the buzzer.

[lemonv]

The reality of US Senate legislation of bills is there are 49 Democrats and Republicans each with 2 Independents. If you consider Lieberman as an Independent with Republican leanings, that would split the US Senate with 50 Democrats and Republicans. With the Vice President breaking the tie, the Republicans will win all the time.

It would be extremely difficult for the Democrats to pass any bills pertaining Iraq because it would need 66.66 or 67 votes (2/3 of 100) to override the presidential veto. They need 17 more votes from the Republicans.

With the unbending decisions of the President with respect to the Iraq war, coupled by the fact that he is a Republican, it is no wonder why the Republicans are still voting against troop withdrawal, even when the majority of Americans are for it.

Cutting the troop funding will also have to go though the same meatgrinder. See below.

Article I, Section 7, of the Constitution provides in part that--

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it becomes a Law, be presented to the President of the United States.

And that is the reality of how to enact laws with a 50/50 split between Repubs and Dems.

Hope this clears up the confusion on why the Democrats find it extremely hard in passing a Withdrawal of troops from Iraq bill.

The only question now is would the Dems not cave in to a non stop Repub pressure that would surely be coming if they ever pass such a bill? If the Dems could withstand this pressure, then the American people will finally know who the obstructionists are.

When the American people has come to this realization, the resulting pressure from their constituents will hopefully force a change of minds to these war hawks so as to override an expected veto of the President.

However, because of "party loyalty" (which is above loyalty to the constitution and loyalty to the people with respect to the Repubs), I doubt that the Repubs would vote for the veto.

[researcher]

they will cave bush and cheney are too much of an asset to stop this war. bush and cheney just keep on giving.

soldiers dying does anyone really think politicans care about people. it is power. look at history.

too much oil to walk away from. must stay to close to getting the second largest oil reserve in the world.

[Mort]

"...Most Aggressive Pursued Thus Far"

Heh... wouldn't take much effort to do that!

[FirstBlowupDollLaura]

Are these the same Dems that refuse to let Sibel Edmond testify? http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/11/9/11226/2103

[DocTwain]

The "centrists" are scared to do anything about this unpopular war and they ought to be, because they voted for it and they've enabled it ever since.

They need to pin the tail on the Elephant.

They need to impeach the Vice President and the President for their Treason in leading us into an unnecessary, profiteering war on the basis of lies.

Once the "centrists" assist real Democrats to officially define the war as an illegal act, then whatever happens in Iraq can no longer hurt the "centrists," who will effectively be born again as Good Democrats.

If "centrists" DON'T impeach, eventual "victory" in Iraq could hurt them (for if the long treasonous profiteering disaster finally ends, it will surely be claimed as a victory by the traitors who started it). On the other hand, if things continue badly in Iraq, "centrists" who have not officially and formally pinned the blame on the Republicans through impeachment will be open to accusations by Republicans of ruining a war that would have been a success if only the Dems hadn't meddled. (They will also continue to be seen as traitors to the working class by progressives and populists.)

PELOSI AND REID!
SUPPLY-SIDE "CENTRIST" DEMOCRATS!
YOU WANT TO SAVE YOUR ASSES?
PIN THE TAIL ON THE ELEPHANT
___________________________________
Impeach the Vice President by March
Impeach the President by April

KUCINICH 2008

[dobberdoss]

Can someone please just ignore this muppet Pelosi! She is worthless! She is probably doing the president in the whitehouse right now.

[jsarets]

Good. I don't expect this bill to pass either house, but at least they can force a vote or a GOP filibuster. Either would be very damaging for those who vote nay or support the filibuster. We deserve to have it clearly on the record which of our representatives see the folly of this occupation and which are inclined to waste lives and money on an entanglement that threatens our national security and inflames global terrorism.

That the progressive caucus doesn't have the votes is not the issue here. The only way to turn the tables is by convincing representatives to change sides, either through rational debate or through political pressure. With public opposition to the occupation at these levels, this is no longer a completely partisan issue. The people are out in front of Congress on this, and if they don't endeavor to catch up, they do so at great risk to their political careers.

This administration deserves no more than a hostile Congress to make their last year in office a living hell. If they need to shut down the federal government because Congress and the White House can't reach common ground, then so be it. The Bush administration divided this country. The last year of their administration will reflect the damage done to our political system.

The best we can hope for is a "do-nothing" Congress. That would be a great improvement from a "rage and cave" Congress. If Bush and/or the Congressional Republicans won't support the will of the people, then they'll get a whole bunch of nothing out of the Democratic Congress. Better to do nothing than to cave to destructive politics.

[FirstBlowupDollLaura]

Another thing:

This whole new Democratic threat and strutting is just a huge waste of time. Everyone knows it will result in nothing. Just a waste of time.

But this same tabloid couldn't find a couple of inches to cover Kucinich's stunning action in the House last Tuesday, getting Cheney's impeachment on the House floor. Some said THAT was a waste of time, but now it is in the Judiciary Committee where it is gaining support. Read the DailyKos today for that; you won't see it here.

No wonder they're calling it FluffPo now.

[FirstBlowupDollLaura]

What a silly and misleading headling. This latest stunt is just like all the others. There is no serious threat to Bush's war in here. The article is just propaganda from the Democratic leadership to make us THINK they are really going to do something. Brought to you by a blogger who thought it appropriate to make fun of Dennis Kucinich over the UFO question.

[lentinelia]

This doesn't appear to be anything.
Bush vetos it.
Then we start again in a month or two.
Meanwhile, the war will continue unabated.

[timbyrnes]

Hopefully the Dems will simply refuse to fund anything other than withdrawal.
Americans are sick of this war and see nothing in it for the US. Cleaning up our mess by spending more money and lives in an aggressive war is stupid.
Being afraid to take a step to stop the war is foolish. Have courage, take the step and move forward. At this point the voter has nothing to show for the human and dollar cost of this stupid war.

[Gonzalez]

So what! The democrats will still cave in to BUsh. No guts there!

[army193]

Better check deeper into this. It's only a goal as I understand it.

[partyofone]

"Dem Iraq Funding Bill Is Most Aggressive Pursued Thus Far" What a joke!

It's now been a year since the election that gave DEMOCRATS control of BOTH houses of Congress with a MANDATE to end American involvement in Iraq. So far, Bush has increased the American commitment by 40,000 troops and billions with not even a glimmer of political progress or an American exit. Meanwhile, Bush oil cronies are going against official policy and making deals with Iraqis to profiteer their oil, which is the REAL reason for the war and our continued occupation.

Nance Pelosi, Jack Reid and their Democratic DO-NOTHING colleagues are WORTHLESS.

"Dem Iraq Funding Bill Is Most Aggressive Pursued Thus Far" What a joke!