Afghanistan Withdrawal Measure Falls Just 12 Votes Short Of Passage In Congress

WASHINGTON -- In its first votes on the war in Afghanistan since the killing of Osama bin Laden, Congress sent a strong message to President Obama that its patience for the conflict is wearing thin.

A measure requiring the President to present a plan "with a timeframe and completion date" for the transfer of military operations to Afghan authorities failed 204-215. It would also have mandated a plan for "negotiations leading to a political solution and reconciliation in Afghanistan" and a new National Intelligence Estimate on al Qaeda.

The withdrawal measure was offered as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, which would authorize $690 billion in defense spending for the next fiscal year.

The amendment, co-sponsored by Reps. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) and Walter Jones (R-N.C.), gained the support of 178 Democrats and 26 Republicans. A similar amendment in the last Congress received 138 votes in support, but only seven of those were cast by Republicans.

This time, freshmen Republican lawmakers formed the largest bloc in the party in voting for the McGovern amendment, and it picked up the support of three GOP members of the House Armed Services Committee.

Notably, both House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) also voted for the amendment, which likely gave other Democrats an opening to also support the measure.

"It is essential that we fight the smartest war possible against terrorists -- but it is fair to ask how a massive troop presence in Afghanistan continues to help us accomplish that goal," said Hoyer on the House floor on Thursday.

"President Obama has promised a drawdown of U.S. troops in July. Now we hear that might just be a token drawdown. This amendment -- and the vote on this amendment -- can send the President a clear signal of support for a meaningful drawdown of troops," said McGovern before the vote.

Reps. Pete Welch (D-Vt.) and Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) co-sponsored a similar amendment, which would have required the Defense Secretary to present a plan to withdraw all U.S. troops from Afghanistan except those engaged in counter-terrorism activities. It failed on a vote of 123 to 294 but gained the support of 18 Republicans. A similar measure this year received 93 votes, just eight of which were from Republicans.

"This is a very clear sign that Congress wants a new policy in Afghanistan," Welch told The Huffington Post after the vote, adding that the death of bin Laden was a major factor in the increased support for withdrawal. "Nation-building for 10 years is ending, even though the votes came up just short. It's very clear there's a growing bipartisan awareness that the time for changing our policy in Afghanistan is here. This gives the President some latitude to accelerate the withdrawal of troops."

He pointed out that the ranking members of the Appropriations Committee, Armed Services Committee and the Foreign Affairs Committee all voted for the McGovern-Jones amendment.

"One of the things many of us in the caucus would like to do is ask our ranking members to cooperate and coordinate in developing an aggressive policy," he added.

President Obama has called for withdrawal from Afghanistan to begin in July and be completed by 2014, but he has not yet released an exact timeline. A recent Wall Street Journal report said that U.S. military officers in Afghanistan have drawn up "preliminary proposals to withdraw as many as 5,000 troops from the country in July and as many as 5,000 more by the year's end" -- a small fraction of the 100,000 U.S. troops who are currently in Afghanistan now.

This piece was updated with Hoyer's remarks.

Comments

[peterz]

08:46 AM on 05/30/2011

I know the conressional vote had nothing to do with the continued killing of civilians, more of which just happened due to an air strike. Mostly children in this case. More crazy apologies by NATO followed.....we've racked up many thousands of civilian deaths there since 2001. It's a certainty that more will die if we stay.....so maybe now in continued pursuit of our own seflish ends the unintended consequence will be our withrawal, and fewer innocent deaths, at least at our hands.....

[WILLIEMOJORISIN]

03:44 PM on 05/29/2011

Obama bring our troops home

[Jeanette Schotl]

09:21 AM on 05/29/2011

Why is it congress can mostly agree on a no-brainer like leaving Afghan, but be so malfunctioning on getting a reasonable and fair budget for the national debt. C'mon, quit playing, Ah, never mind, the pay-offs from special interests are jamming the airwaves

[Jeanette Schotl]

09:00 AM on 05/29/2011

That's a rough one. No one wants to be there, but we need to come close to the area being self-sustaining. I am thinking of all our soldiers's efforts and sacrifice. I am amazed and proud of them, their training makes them excellent warriors. Obama is working with the best military and civilian experts that are around, There should be positive results. India and a few surrounding nations are stepping up to support Karzai's efforts at stabilizing the country. Afghanistan sure has had a rough history, it's no wonder when we first went there the buildings were all rubble. In the job of leaving Afghanistan, I'm the one out in the car, honking the horn to get going, tell ya what!

[karim banned]

03:26 AM on 05/29/2011

It is very simple. We leave Afghanistan when we, like USSR, are bankrupt.

We do not leave until the dollar is worth more than Ruble.

[GunnyJ]

08:48 PM on 05/28/2011

Remember why back when when POTUS was hammered for the 7/11 drawdown?

[TheSarge]

06:41 PM on 05/27/2011

This makes me angry!

[smalljaws]

01:19 AM on 05/27/2011

American foreign policy has been driven by illusions of grandeur where the lines between strategy and ideology have been blurred. The overextension of our military and the funding of the Long War puts us in a crisis of profligacy which will lead to bankruptcy and ruin. The notion that a 100,000 troops are needed on the ground to eliminate a 100 jihadists is foolhardy. Continued occupation is self defeating as it acts as a recruitment tool. Bringing home 10% of the troops in a years time is unacceptable. Troop levels should be drawn down to Bush era numbers (40,000) by next summer. Bipartisan consensus is attainable. Preventing the sponsors of radical Islam from extending their influence should be part of a more effective containment policy.

[rhuffie]

12:47 AM on 05/27/2011

So many posts about Al Quaeda not being in Afghanistan anymore...so we should get out now.
It's only about us?
And our national interest?
What about our national honor?
We created the monster in the first place by only acting in our self interest.
In this respect, our foreign policy has been corrupt for a long long time.
Once we meddle in a country, and then change the course of their history, we have no further responsibility?
We just cut and run and leave them in a shambles?
That's not honorable.
We have to at least try to help.
Obama's plan is good; to give a surge a year or so and then, after we have attempted to make thing better, get out. His timetable for the drawdown begins this summer and our military is making plans to do this. He needs to be good to his word on this.

[Luanne Taylor]

11:10 PM on 05/26/2011

I thought we had a date, it better still be July 2011 but they want to take 3 years to get out? too long....move NOW, faster, speed is the key

[RRK70]

11:04 PM on 05/26/2011

just wait until some of the domestic budget cuts necessary to perpetuate this war come home to roost...those 12 votes will show up overnight. As I've suggested before, make US withdrawal a referendum on the ballot in Afghanistan, and when they vote us out we can claim that democracy has done what the Taliban could not, that the power of the ballot is greater than that of the bullet.....and we can leave believing democracy has won out......heck with all the savings we could probably afford a decent ticker tape parade.

[CAdawn]

10:55 PM on 05/26/2011

It won't make any difference whether we spend another 10 years in Afghanistan or another week. Nothing will change. We should have left years ago, but now that OBL is dead is a good reason for the politicians to act.
July 2011 was the date. It should still be the date for a large drawdown. It's past time to go.

[Dewts]

10:49 PM on 05/26/2011

it only takes one command, from one democrat, to end all the wars immediately.

[hippy26ish]

10:41 PM on 05/26/2011

this is upsetting. these brave men deserve to come home now. most are being deployed after 10 times; it's unfair to them and their families

[Boots in Their Snoots]

10:21 PM on 05/26/2011

After we leave Afghanistan, the population of Waziristan will flow back into their old haunts and continue their old ways, and that will ensure a complete defeat of American policy from Presidents Clinton thru Obama.

[Dewts]

10:48 PM on 05/26/2011

there is no winning in afghanistan.