Democrats Not Backing Down on Iraq Bill

[soothsayer]

WASHINGTON (AP) - House Democratic leaders are indicating they are not ready to back down in their confrontation with President Bush on Iraq, even as pressure mounts to approve new funding for U.S. troops.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other party leaders are considering a bill that would fund the war as Bush wants, but only guarantee the money through July. After that, Congress could block additional money from being sent if the Iraqi government does not meet certain political and security goals.

The proposal, not yet endorsed or briefed to caucus members, would be a direct challenge to the president, who has demanded Congress fund the war with no strings attached. This week, Bush vetoed a $124.2 billion bill that would have provided money for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan while requiring troops to begin coming home by Oct. 1.
....

Democrats say they will provide troops in combat the resources they need and will send Bush a bill by the end of the month. The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has reported that the Army has enough bookkeeping flexibility to fund war operations until July.

snip

much more here

http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/20070504/D8OTH54G0.html

[acmavm]

1. Giving bush** what he wants until July isn't backing down?

What happens in July that will make the difference? Will they stick to their guns in July?

<snip>

In a closed-door leadership meeting Thursday, Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., suggested that the House guarantee funding of the war only through July. The bill would provide additional money after that point, but give Congress a chance to deny those funds be used if the Iraqi government does not meet certain benchmarks.

Under Obey's proposal, members would vote separately on whether to fund some of the domestic spending in the Iraq bill that Bush opposed, such as agricultural assistance.

The plan was described by Democratic aides who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the plan. According to a senior Democratic leadership aide, the plan has not been endorsed by Pelosi or in the Senate.

<snip>

While the House could narrowly pass the measure, it is unlikely to find similar backing in the Senate, where some leading Democrats say they want to fund the war through September.

<snip>

Sounds like a bunch who REALLY REALLY are taking firm steps to give the American people what they want to me. :sarcasm:

[soothsayer]

2. well, they still do sound like weenies, but at least it's not a real live

blank check for the endless war.

[acmavm]

4. No, I guess not. They'll just give it to him like an allowance.

HE STILL GETS WHAT HE WANTS!!!!!!

[Hubert Flottz]

3. They should make Bush tell them WHY he needs EVERY dollar.

What will it pay for.

We can't afford to pay for the Iraqi's 2 month vacations.

[Toots]

5. It has been widely reported that there already is money in the hopper through July

So what is their point. The funds are already in place to last through July. So what they add now will have to carry it through say October..... I think October is going to be their sticking point.. :shrug:

[Nite Owl]

6. Not a bad compromise

It means the whole issue will be brought up again for review, hopefully the repukes will be willing to sign on then to save their own hides. They can't be accused of not funding the troops and if the benchmarks are not met then the dems have to withhold funding at that point.