From The Hotline Latest Edition for Wednesday, May 7,2008

IRAQ

Don't Play With Matches

Wed. May 7, 2008


The House drafted a new war-spending bill 5/6 "that would prohibit using U.S. aid to rebuild towns or equip security forces in Iraq unless Baghdad matches every dollar spent."

The legislation "also includes a provision to aid the U.S. economy, by extending unemployment insurance coverage for up to six months for jobless people whose benefits have run out" -- a provision that would cost about $11B over ten years. Iraq and Afghanistan veterans also would begin to receive a boost in college aid of $720M through '09.

The $195B measure, "to be voted on as early as" 5/8, would fulfill Pres. Bush's demands for military and diplomatic operations in Iraq and Afghanistan until the next POTUS can set his or her own policy. But "lacking the votes to force troops home," Dems "are using the bill instead to assert to voters that the war is to blame for the nation's economic woes."

Dems will also try again to force U.S. troops home. "The bill would require that troops start leaving Iraq within 30 days of its enactment and set a nonbinding goal of withdrawing combat troops by the end of" Dec. '09. "It also would require that any troops deployed into a combat zone exceed the Pentagon's peacetime standards for being fully trained and equipped." However, "both of these provisions are expected to fail in the Senate and be stripped from a final bill the House is to approve this spring" (Flaherty, AP, 5/7).

Make Way For Liberty!

Senior Dems on the Senate Approps Cmte "are pushing back against" Senate Maj. Leader Harry Reid "for suggesting he might bypass their panel and send a massive emergency war spending bill directly to the Senate floor."

Cmte Chair Robert Byrd (D-WV) on 5/6 scheduled a markup for 5/8 on the bill, "sending a signal to Reid that he doesn't agree with a strategy that calls for skipping" the cmte. Byrd "received the support of a number of appropriators," who also questioned the idea of moving a bill that could cost $200B for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and for a handful of other domestic priorities straight to the Senate floor.

The "division" among Dems "comes despite weeks of closed-door negotiations led by Reid" and Speaker Nancy Pelosi "to craft a narrowly tailored bill and devise a strategy to limit extraneous amendments that would prompt" a WH veto.

Meanwhile, Reid spokesperson Jim Manley "didn't voice objections to the markup." Manley: "Sen. Byrd is well within his rights to have the Senate Appropriations Committee express its views on the House's supplemental amendments. We hope Senate Republicans permit the Senate Appropriations Committee's amendments to receive votes on the Senate floor when we turn to the supplemental" (Raju, The Hill, 5/6).