chelsea<3josh
04-25-2007, 09:55 PM
Interesting to see what happens next now that it has gone this far... Whatcha think?
House passes Iraq withdrawal timetable
POSTED: 9:36 p.m. EDT, April 25, 2007
• NEW: House passes bill setting Iraq withdrawal deadline
• NEW: 218-208 vote includes 9 Democratic votes against
• Bill would require first combat troops begin to pull out of Iraq October 1
• President Bush charges that war spending bill is a "political" statement
Adjust font size:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush and the Democratic-controlled Congress lurched toward a veto showdown over Iraq on Wednesday, as the House passed legislation that would order troops to begin coming home by October 1.
The bill passed the House by a vote of 218-208. Nine Democrats voted against the bill and two Republicans voted for it.
President Bush has promised to veto any legislation that contains a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops.
Republicans said setting a timetable on the war would hand a victory to terrorists.
"Setting a date and conveying it to the enemy and telegraphing to them verbatim that the war is lost is not the right posture for this government to take," said Rep. Adam Putnam, R-Florida.
The House vote came as the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, and other defense officials tried to convince lawmakers that a timetable would push Iraq into chaos. But Democrats said they were undeterred, guaranteeing a historic confrontation with Bush.
"For the first time, the president will have to be accountable for this war in Iraq," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said Tuesday. "And he does not want to face that reality."
The $124.2 billion bill would fund, among other things, the war in Iraq but trigger the withdrawal of troops beginning this fall. It sets a nonbinding goal of completing the pullout by April 1, 2008.
Troops could remain in Iraq after the 2008 date but only for limited non-combat missions, including counterterrorism operations and training Iraqi forces.
The bill, already negotiated with Senate leaders, is expected to reach the president's desk by early next week following a final Senate vote Thursday.
Democrats view the November elections that allowed them to take control of the House and the Senate as a referendum on Bush's conduct of the war. Bush, however, says he stands firm on his latest strategy for winning the war and dismisses as counterproductive the Democratic call for withdrawal.
"That means our commanders in the middle of a combat zone would have to take fighting directions from legislators 6,000 miles away on Capitol Hill," Bush told reporters Tuesday. "The result would be a marked advantage for our enemies and a greater danger for our troops."
Whether Democratic leaders had enough votes to pass the bill in the House had been in question. The original House bill included a binding timeline, demanding withdrawal by September 2008. Several of the 218 members who approved the bill said they reluctantly agreed to back the binding timeline even though they wanted troops home sooner.
But several House members said they would not rally opposition to the bill negotiated with the Senate in a bid for party unity.
"We need to claim victory for our soldiers," said Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, D-Texas. "They have done their job. It's time to bring them home now."
During the day Wednesday, House leaders predicted the bill would pass.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Illinois, chairman of the Democratic caucus, said, "We feel very good about where the caucus is."
In recent days, the debate turned personal, with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, and Pelosi receiving the brunt of GOP frustration.
Republicans on Wednesday seized on Reid's comment that the war was "lost." Reid told reporters last week that he believed strides in Iraq could only be made on the military, political and diplomatic front.
"It is fairly irresponsible rhetoric at a time of war to make such a sweeping declaration," Putnam said. "It certainly doesn't do anything to help the morale of our troops in harm's way."
Republicans also attacked Pelosi for what they said was a snub of Petraeus on the eve of the critical vote. Pelosi did not attend Wednesday's briefing by the four-star general, instead opting for a 30-minute phone call with him Tuesday evening. Reid did attend the Senate session.
"It is shameful that while our troops wake up every morning and courageously face death in defense of our freedom, the politicians in charge of Congress can't even find the time to meet face-to-face with their commander," said House Republican Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Pelosi responded in a statement that she received from Petraeus the same information he planned to deliver to members later Wednesday.
"We share a conviction that the war in Iraq will not be resolved militarily, and I look forward to future reports from him on the effects of President Bush's escalation plan," she said.
Just hours before debate on the bill began, House Majority Whip Roy Blunt told reporters he was not concerned about GOP defections despite the unpopularity of the war. But Blunt, R-Missouri, said he does think progress must be made soon or that could change.
Blunt also said Republicans would be open to legislation that would condition foreign aid for Iraq on the government's ability to meet certain standards, such as reaching a political compromise on sharing oil revenues.
"I do believe incentives are good things in that area," said Blunt.
The White House and Democrats had traded insults on Tuesday. Vice President Dick Cheney accused Reid of pursuing a defeatist strategy in Iraq to win votes at home. (Full story)
"Some Democratic leaders seem to believe that blind opposition to the new strategy in Iraq is good politics," Cheney told reporters at the Capitol after attending the weekly Republican policy lunch. "Senator Reid himself has said that the war in Iraq will bring his party more seats in the next election." (Watch Vice President Cheney blast Democrats' war strategy )
"It is cynical to declare that the war is lost because you believe it gives you political advantage," Cheney said.
Reid, D-Nevada, dismissed Cheney's comments. "I'm not going to get into a name-calling match with the administration's chief attack dog," he told reporters. (Watch Reid and Sen. Chuck Shumer, D-New York, respond to Cheney )
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
House passes Iraq withdrawal timetable
POSTED: 9:36 p.m. EDT, April 25, 2007
• NEW: House passes bill setting Iraq withdrawal deadline
• NEW: 218-208 vote includes 9 Democratic votes against
• Bill would require first combat troops begin to pull out of Iraq October 1
• President Bush charges that war spending bill is a "political" statement
Adjust font size:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush and the Democratic-controlled Congress lurched toward a veto showdown over Iraq on Wednesday, as the House passed legislation that would order troops to begin coming home by October 1.
The bill passed the House by a vote of 218-208. Nine Democrats voted against the bill and two Republicans voted for it.
President Bush has promised to veto any legislation that contains a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops.
Republicans said setting a timetable on the war would hand a victory to terrorists.
"Setting a date and conveying it to the enemy and telegraphing to them verbatim that the war is lost is not the right posture for this government to take," said Rep. Adam Putnam, R-Florida.
The House vote came as the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, and other defense officials tried to convince lawmakers that a timetable would push Iraq into chaos. But Democrats said they were undeterred, guaranteeing a historic confrontation with Bush.
"For the first time, the president will have to be accountable for this war in Iraq," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said Tuesday. "And he does not want to face that reality."
The $124.2 billion bill would fund, among other things, the war in Iraq but trigger the withdrawal of troops beginning this fall. It sets a nonbinding goal of completing the pullout by April 1, 2008.
Troops could remain in Iraq after the 2008 date but only for limited non-combat missions, including counterterrorism operations and training Iraqi forces.
The bill, already negotiated with Senate leaders, is expected to reach the president's desk by early next week following a final Senate vote Thursday.
Democrats view the November elections that allowed them to take control of the House and the Senate as a referendum on Bush's conduct of the war. Bush, however, says he stands firm on his latest strategy for winning the war and dismisses as counterproductive the Democratic call for withdrawal.
"That means our commanders in the middle of a combat zone would have to take fighting directions from legislators 6,000 miles away on Capitol Hill," Bush told reporters Tuesday. "The result would be a marked advantage for our enemies and a greater danger for our troops."
Whether Democratic leaders had enough votes to pass the bill in the House had been in question. The original House bill included a binding timeline, demanding withdrawal by September 2008. Several of the 218 members who approved the bill said they reluctantly agreed to back the binding timeline even though they wanted troops home sooner.
But several House members said they would not rally opposition to the bill negotiated with the Senate in a bid for party unity.
"We need to claim victory for our soldiers," said Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, D-Texas. "They have done their job. It's time to bring them home now."
During the day Wednesday, House leaders predicted the bill would pass.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Illinois, chairman of the Democratic caucus, said, "We feel very good about where the caucus is."
In recent days, the debate turned personal, with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, and Pelosi receiving the brunt of GOP frustration.
Republicans on Wednesday seized on Reid's comment that the war was "lost." Reid told reporters last week that he believed strides in Iraq could only be made on the military, political and diplomatic front.
"It is fairly irresponsible rhetoric at a time of war to make such a sweeping declaration," Putnam said. "It certainly doesn't do anything to help the morale of our troops in harm's way."
Republicans also attacked Pelosi for what they said was a snub of Petraeus on the eve of the critical vote. Pelosi did not attend Wednesday's briefing by the four-star general, instead opting for a 30-minute phone call with him Tuesday evening. Reid did attend the Senate session.
"It is shameful that while our troops wake up every morning and courageously face death in defense of our freedom, the politicians in charge of Congress can't even find the time to meet face-to-face with their commander," said House Republican Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Pelosi responded in a statement that she received from Petraeus the same information he planned to deliver to members later Wednesday.
"We share a conviction that the war in Iraq will not be resolved militarily, and I look forward to future reports from him on the effects of President Bush's escalation plan," she said.
Just hours before debate on the bill began, House Majority Whip Roy Blunt told reporters he was not concerned about GOP defections despite the unpopularity of the war. But Blunt, R-Missouri, said he does think progress must be made soon or that could change.
Blunt also said Republicans would be open to legislation that would condition foreign aid for Iraq on the government's ability to meet certain standards, such as reaching a political compromise on sharing oil revenues.
"I do believe incentives are good things in that area," said Blunt.
The White House and Democrats had traded insults on Tuesday. Vice President Dick Cheney accused Reid of pursuing a defeatist strategy in Iraq to win votes at home. (Full story)
"Some Democratic leaders seem to believe that blind opposition to the new strategy in Iraq is good politics," Cheney told reporters at the Capitol after attending the weekly Republican policy lunch. "Senator Reid himself has said that the war in Iraq will bring his party more seats in the next election." (Watch Vice President Cheney blast Democrats' war strategy )
"It is cynical to declare that the war is lost because you believe it gives you political advantage," Cheney said.
Reid, D-Nevada, dismissed Cheney's comments. "I'm not going to get into a name-calling match with the administration's chief attack dog," he told reporters. (Watch Reid and Sen. Chuck Shumer, D-New York, respond to Cheney )
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.