By Jen DiMascio
Members of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) met yesterday without their Senate counterparts to discuss a conference report on a bill to authorize Pentagon spending in this fiscal year.
The inclusion of hate crimes language in the bill continues to block passage, members acknowledged after the brief meeting.
HASC Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) said a meeting later in the day was possible–if “minds changed.”
By the end of the day, no additional meetings had been officially scheduled, Skelton’s office said.
The date for the conference had been set far in advance, and members of the House decided to keep the meeting to talk about the issues, Rep. Jim Marshall (D-Ga.) said.
“We all certainly hope that we can get this done,” Marshall said. “At this point, there’s no deal.”
As of press time, the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) would not comment on when a conference might take place. Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the chairman of the committee, said on Dec. 4, he hoped to move the bill this week.
Passage of the bill is crucial, Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii), the chairman of the HASC air and land forces subcommittee, said last month. It is vitally important because the bill addresses important policies for the Department of Defense such as those that provide for the readiness of U.S. troops, he said. Last month, he expressed concern about the inclusion of hate crimes language in the bill. Although he supports hate crimes legislation and supports the defense authorization bill, the combination of the two measures could prevent passage (Defense Daily, Nov. 19).
Before the HASC meeting, the House voted on a Republican motion to instruct conferees that was drafted by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), the HASC ranking member and characterized by an aide as a last-ditch effort by the GOP to influence the conference.
The motion told House conferees to sign off on a Senate amendment that says the Senate should not “commit itself to a strategy that will not leave a failed state in Iraq and the Senate should not pass legislation that will undermine our military’s ability to prevent a failed state in Iraq.” The motion also told House conferees to accept the war funding provision of the defense authorization bill. That does not contain any conditions pertaining to the Iraq war.
Although it passed, 81 Democrats, many of whom who oppose authorizing war funding without constraints, voted against the motion to instruct conferees.
Those voting against the motion include Abercrombie and Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee.
Opposition of Democrats would help seal the fate of the authorization bill, according to a House Republican aide, who said that combined with Republicans who oppose the bill on hate crimes, there are not enough votes to pass the bill.
Abercrombie is dismissing the motion as “partisan, political stuff,” according to Dave Helfert, Abercrombie’s spokesman. If the motion remains in the bill, Abercrombie would consider voting against the final version but would consult with Skelton about doing so, Helfert said.