By Jen DiMascio
As Congress returned this week to continue debating funding for the war, the Senate majority leader said a vote on war funding was likely during the next three weeks.
Democrats in that chamber appeared yesterday to be willing to consider concessions to provide funding for the war.
Before the Thanksgiving break, the House passed a $50 billion war funding bill that included provisions outlawing torture, calling for a plan for troop withdraw and mandating that troops be fully trained and equipped before deploying.
That bill failed to gain enough votes to pass in the Senate.
Yesterday, President Bush continued his call on Congress to pass a war funding bill.
“Beginning in February, I submitted detailed funding requests to Congress to fund these operations in the war on terror. Yet some in Congress are withholding this funding because they want to substitute their judgment for that of our military commanders. Instead of listening to the judgment of General Petraeus, they are threatening to withhold money he needs unless they can mandate an arbitrary date of withdrawal,” Bush said.
Yesterday Senate Democrats said they want to pass a bill before Christmas and would continue to push hard for concessions on Iraq.
Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he hoped the bill and the conditions within it would change and said it was likely to be considered by the Senate before the next recess.
“I have reason to believe there’s been some changes on both sides. I think that there’s a general feeling that President Bush is unreasonable. The Republicans, I think, feel that way also. And that being the case, maybe there’s some way we can work something out. At this stage, frankly, the Republican senators–with rare exceptions–have gone along with what the president has asked they do. I’m not sure that will continue much longer,” Reid told reporters.
Some acknowledged holding fast to the Iraq war provisions–particularly calling for a troop withdraw plan may be difficult.
“We want to finish it,” said Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.). “We’re dealing with the reality that the White House is giving us some very stark choices in terms of the appropriations process.”
Durbin, who in the past has said he does not want to provide another blank check for the war in Iraq, said he wants more than a possible compromise of calling for a change of mission in Iraq without even a goal for withdrawal. “But I’m also a realist,” he said.
Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said it is in everyone’s interests to pass war funding before the holiday. “I’m advocating as strong a statement as we can get 60 votes for,” he said, referring to the number of votes it will take to pass in the Senate.
Republicans also stressed the need to pass war funding before the end of the month.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said he has been talking with the White House but has not provided them with a recommendation.
“I do think that we can’t leave here not dealing with the troop funding issue, and given the lack of time available, the best way to deal with the troop funding issue would be in the context of some kind of settlement on an overall omnibus appropriation bill, just in terms of the amount of time left,” McConnell said.
Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), the ranking member of the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee, returned from a trip to Iraq with Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), the subcommittee chairman, still pressing for a $70 billion bridge fund with no conditions.
“This isn’t a shell game,” Stevens said.