House sustains Bush veto of Iraq spending bill

[XtremeJibber2001]

House sustains Bush veto of Iraq spending bill

By David Jackson and Kathy Kiely, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — As expected, the House on Wednesday did not override President Bush's veto of an Iraq war funding bill backed by Democrats, setting the stage for negotiations between Bush and Congress on the future of the U.S. presence in the war-torn country.

The House voted 223-203 to override the veto — far short of the two-thirds vote needed for the override to take effect. The vote came one day after Bush vetoed the measure, which tied funding to a timetable for removing U.S. troops from Iraq.

The vote was preceded by a short but bitterly partisan debate over the veto. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said the Bush administration "should get a clue" about the wishes of the American public. Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., said Democrats have "had your dog and pony show" and needed to take concrete steps to provide funding to the U.S. military.

House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio said the funding measure "almost mandates failure in Iraq," which led to a strident response from Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee.

"The president's policy has already destabilized the Middle East," Obey said. "The only question about the president's policy is whether it will yield a disaster or whether it will yield a catastrophe."

Bush sent the bill back to Capitol Hill Wednesday morning after vetoing the bill Tuesday. After the House vote, congressional leaders went to the White House to meet with Bush, who named chief of staff Josh Bolten as his point person on negotiations.

Those negotiations are "not going to be easy but it's important," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

"We made our position clear. He made his position clear," Pelosi said of the meeting, which lasted only 30 minutes.

"I am confident that with goodwill on both sides that we can move beyond political statements and agree on a bill that gives our troops the funds and flexibility to do the job that we asked them to do," the president said in a speech Wednesday to the Associated General Contractors of America in Washington.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told reporters Wednesday that he hopes to have a new bill passed in the House in two weeks, with a final bill sent to the president before the Memorial Day recess.

"We're not going to leave our troops in harm's way … without the resources they need," said Hoyer, D-Md. Hoyer was reluctant to say exactly what the bill will look like, but said he anticipates a minimum-wage increase will be part of it. He also said the bill should fund combat through Sept. 30 as Bush has requested, casting doubt that Democratic leaders would adopt a proposal by Rep. John Murtha, R-Pa., to fund the war two or three months at a time.

Tuesday's veto, only the second of Bush's presidency, came four years after he declared an end to major combat operations in Iraq. More than 3,300 U.S. troops have died since Baghdad was invaded in March 2003.

"Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a date for failure, and that would be irresponsible," Bush said in a brief statement from the White House. Bush said the vetoed bill "substitutes the opinions of politicians for the judgment of our military commanders."

Murtha, a war critic who is the House's top defense appropriator, said a new, scaled-down bill stressing funding for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan is "written and ready to go." Murtha said he sympathizes with war opponents who want to end U.S. involvement now, but "we've got to fund the damn operations."

There is no agreement in Congress on how to proceed.

Murtha has proposed a bill that would provide funding for the wars for two months. Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, the Senate's top defense appropriator, called the idea "not practical." Murtha and Inouye are both combat veterans.

Other lawmakers are looking for a compromise, built around the idea of pairing the money with certain "benchmarks" for the Iraqi government. Those are goals the Iraqi government would have to meet to demonstrate progress, such as passage of a law on distribution of oil revenue.

"There are a number of Republicans who do think that some kind of benchmarks, properly crafted, would actually be helpful," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

Murtha said the skirmishes over the emergency bill will pale compared with the "big battle" to come when Congress tries to provide Iraq funding for 2008. He said the results of Bush's troop buildup should be clear by the time that debate begins this summer. "By then," Murtha said, "we will know."

[XtremeJibber2001]

Somewhat surprised by the results thus far.

Has this type of strategy of telling your enemy when you'll be leaving worked in the past? Has it ever been tried? Did it lead to success?

[Dr. NO]

Somewhat surprised by the results thus far.

Has this type of strategy of telling your enemy when you'll be leaving worked in the past? Has it ever been tried? Did it lead to success?

We told the North Vietnamese we were leaving, and they were knocking at the door before we finished the move.

[XtremeJibber2001]

Somewhat surprised by the results thus far.

Has this type of strategy of telling your enemy when you'll be leaving worked in the past? Has it ever been tried? Did it lead to success?

We told the North Vietnamese we were leaving, and they were knocking at the door before we finished the move.

We barely got out of there via Operation Frequent Wind, right? This was the Fall of Saigon?

By this time the Ford administration had also begun planning a complete evacuation of the American presence. Planning was complicated by practical, legal, and strategic concerns. The administration was divided on how swift the evacuations should be. The Pentagon sought to evacuate as fast as possible, to avoid the risk of casualties or other accidents. The Ambassador to South Vietnam, Graham Martin, was technically the field commander for any evacuation, since evacuations are in the purview of the State Department. Martin drew the ire of many in the Pentagon by wishing to keep the evacuation process as quiet and orderly as possible. His desire for this was to prevent total chaos and to deflect the real possibility of South Vietnamese turning against Americans, and to keep all-out bloodshed from occurring.

Sounds frighteningly similar to what happened in Vietnam. One thing is for certain, if the evacuation is anything similar to that of Saigon or even worse, Democrats won't even chirp in 2008, but hopefully they think this through on both sides of the fence.

[BigKahuna13]

Somewhat surprised by the results thus far.

Has this type of strategy of telling your enemy when you'll be leaving worked in the past? Has it ever been tried? Did it lead to success?

The issue isn't telling the enemy when we're leaving. The issue is our people are dying to protect people who won't defend themselves. An open ended committment like the one we currently have with the joke-of -an-Iraqi government is an invitation to be abused.

Whether we're there or not, the state of Iraq will cease to exist at some point and we'll be left with separate Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite states that'll probably still be shooting at each other 100 years from now.

We really need to stop bleeding for these people.

[XtremeJibber2001]

The issue isn't telling the enemy when we're leaving.

IMHO, we should start to pull-out now, but I don't think any date should be publicized for obvious reasons ... putting a bill through congress is making that date very well known.

Unfortunately, any time frame will be made public regardless due to leaks.

I'm all ears for how we should get out of there, but saying "4/11/08 we're leaving" isn't the most ideal method, which is why Pelosi does not speak for me.

[millerm277]

I want us out of there.....starting now would be fine with me.

There is no way the insurgents are going to go away, and we haven't accomplished anything, nor are we likely to in the future. Let them work it out...the Sunni's and Shiite's are going to fight for a while, but oh well....

Work something out with Turkey to solve their problem with the Kurds, as they know how to run a govt, and can govern themselves well.