IRAQ: The Endangered Republican
15 March 2007 4:20 pm by Taylor Marsh
IRAQ: The Endangered Republican
CNN is reporting that an aviation brigade of helicopters will be deployed into Iraq, bumping up the numbers another 3,000. So the build up in Iraq continues. However, Jack Murtha also said that since Secretary Gates came on board the reports out of the Pentagon have been realistic. The pressure continues to build.
Stoller said it
best today. Republicans either end the Iraq war or they will end
their careers. That goes for the Blue Dog Dems as far as I\’m concerned, unless
they can now be whipped into line. Arcuri already has been, saying he\’ll support the
supplemental. I\’m also very happy to say that Sestak has now joined in, too:
\”Although I am disappointed there is not one fixed date certain by the
end of the year to redeploy out of Iraq, as my legislation proposes, in order
to permit a change in strategy to where the Iraqis as well as Iranians and
Syrians have an incentive to work for stability, I am pleased we are moving
in the right direction for an end date to this War, so we can enhance our
security around the world.\” – Rep. Joe Sestak
On what was basically a party line vote, Reid\’s
legislation went down 48 – 50, with Lieberman, Ben Nelson and Pryor joining
the Republicans, with Gordon Smith voting with the Democrats. No one is going to
say this is perfect, least of all me. However, we\’ve come a long way from 2002,
when I was screaming at Democrats on the radio about giving Mr. Bush a blank
check. Senate Democrats came together, including Feingold, Kerry and others who wanted stricter troop withdrawal and funding language. In the end it couldn\’t get done. But Senate Democrats have tied the escalation and future
build up of Iraq to the Republicans. You simply cannot blame Democrats for further Iraq build up. It\’s all on the Republicans.
But for me, Speaker Pelosi is cast as the political heroine. Between the Blue
Dog Dems and the Out of Iraq caucus, mix in the Republicans, as well as Democrats
like Sestak who wanted stronger language, it\’s quite something she got the supplemental
out of committee, with the Out of Iraq caucus singing her praises, while a bill
goes forward for a vote.
Once-ignored members of the Out of Iraq Caucus are now some of the most sought-after
votes in the House as Democratic leaders search for the support they need
to pass a carefully crafted Iraq supplemental budget.And the caucus membership has started to split between those insisting on
an immediate withdrawal and those willing to vote for legislation that falls
short of their hopes.They suffered a defeat this week when the latest draft of the bill was released
without language blocking President Bush from attacking Iran. But members
said Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has promised a separate floor vote on
the issue. The activist group Win Without War is calling on its members to
contact lawmakers and press to reinstate that language.The first test comes today when the House Appropriations Committee votes
on the $124.1 billion bill. Of the 37 Democratic members of the committee,
12 are from the Out of Iraq Caucus. That means if they all defect, and Republicans
stick together, the bill would fail. Such a vote would also likely be viewed
as a major blow to Democratic leadership.But they aren’t all defecting. It’s not clear how many will support
the bill, but some certainly will, such as Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.). Honda
is among those who say they’re setting aside their personal preferences
to pass a bill and help their party govern.“If I had my choice, we’d be out by now,” Honda said.
Another is Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), an appropriator and caucus member who
supports the bill. He says one reason is that Pelosi won him over with her
hard work on the bill.“We’re not going to get any better, and a ‘no’ vote
plays into the hands of the White House,” Moran said.Out of Iraq Caucus members say they have 20 to 30 votes against the bill,
Moran said, such as that of caucus co-founder Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.).
She has nothing but praise for Pelosi’s handling of the bill but says
she can’t support something that, in her mind, continues to fund the
war. … …
No matter how you feel about the immediacy and the money aspect in the short-term,
the impact is that the Democrats all stood up and voted to send Bush a message
on Iraq. Representing what the people voted for last November, Democrats are saying it\’s over; maybe not today or next month, but the Democrats are on the president\’s neck and will not lift up until the course is dramatically changed.
As for the Republicans, they\’re standing by George W. Bush, ignoring the
message sent in the 2006 election. Republicans want to continue the the Iraq war.
First job for Democrats, get Bush to change course so we can end the Iraq war. Next job: end the careers of all
the Republicans who continue to support it. As with anything in politics, when you have different people all competing to get their own ideas heard and implemented, it\’s about taking steps towards the goal, not abandoning the goal because you can\’t get there in one step.
