Bush, House lock horns over Iraq withdrawal

WASHINGTON — The House voted Friday to set an Aug. 31, 2008, deadline for withdrawing all U.S. combat troops from Iraq, confronting President Bush with his most serious challenge over the conflict.

Soon after the bill passed 218-212, Bush accused Democrats of "an act of political theater" by passing a bill that has "no chance of becoming law and brings us no closer to getting our troops the resources they need to do their job." He also repeated his threat to veto the legislation, which is tied to a $124 billion spending bill that includes funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He accused Democrats of jeopardizing U.S. troops in the field in an attempt "to score political points."

If a new spending bill, without conditions, is not approved and signed into law before April 15, Bush warned, it would put troops in danger as current funding of the war is set to dry up in a matter of weeks.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday that a holdup in funding would force the Army to delay training of units and halt repair of vital equipment.

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Friday that Democrats would fight to make their proposal law. "The American people have lost faith in the president's conduct of this war," said Pelosi, D-Calif. "The American people see the reality of the war. The president does not."

It seems unlikely the measure will become law, at least in its current form, because Democrats lack the two-thirds vote to override a veto.

But in what is emerging as a political game of chicken with the White House, the Senate begins debate Monday on its version of the bill, which would require troops to start pulling out of Iraq within 120 days of passage and would set March 31, 2008, as a "goal" for completing the withdrawal.

House bill

$96 billion for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Unspecified number of combat troops out of Iraq next spring, with complete withdrawal on Aug. 31, 2008.

Benchmarks for Iraqi government, including amending constitution to protect minority rights, disarming militias, fair distribution of oil revenues and reducing sectarian violence.

Earlier withdrawal of combat troops if president cannot certify that Iraqis are meeting benchmarks.

Some troops left behind to conduct counterterrorism missions and train Iraqi forces.

A year's rest for Army troops between combat tours and required readiness standards (can be waived if president provides report to Congress).

$1 billion to protect against pandemic flu, $1.7 billion for defense health programs and $4 billion for agricultural assistance.

Previously passed legislation that would increase minimum wage and cut some related small-business taxes.

The Associated Press

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the bills reflect "what the American people asked for in November: redeploying our troops out of Iraq and refocusing our resources to more effectively fight the war on terror."

The bid to force the redeployment of U.S. troops faces uncertain prospects in the narrowly divided Senate, where Republicans have so far stymied Democratic efforts to dictate military strategy.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., joined at a news conference by Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., promised: "We will defeat this on the floor of the Senate."

Bush told Democrats their plan to set a certain end date for the war was ill-advised, and he criticized them for attaching "pork-barrel" spending to the bill, pet projects with no direct connection to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars but meant to win over on-the-fence Democrats.

Among projects attached to the legislation are funding for spinach subsidies and money to rebuild levees destroyed by Hurricane Katrina.

"This bill has too much pork, too many conditions and an artificial timetable for withdrawal," Bush said. "As I have made clear for weeks, I will veto it if it comes to my desk."

Congress has provided more than $500 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, including about $350 billion for Iraq alone, according to the Congressional Research Service.

The pullout provision calls for troop withdrawals to begin in March 2008, with all combat forces out by Aug. 31. The bill also calls for the Iraqi government to achieve a series of performance benchmarks and for Bush to certify the readiness of U.S. troops being deployed.

Emotions ran high during the four hours of debate that stretched over two days.

Patrick Murphy, D-Pa., a former 82nd Airborne Division officer who served in Iraq, spoke of 19 fellow paratroopers in his unit who were killed. Murphy said the vote offered members of the House a chance to show leadership.

As he spoke, his voice wavered as he recalled a soldier in his command asking when the Iraqis would step up and deal with their security problems.

"He said, 'Sir, what are we still doing over here?' " Murphy said.

Republicans called on Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Texas, an Air Force pilot who was a prisoner of war after being shot down over North Vietnam. Johnson said troops in the field "need the full support of their country and their Congress."

He also bemoaned the extraneous home-state sweeteners in the bill to pay for shrimping and spinach subsidies and an earmark for a peanut-storage facility in Georgia.

"What does throwing money at ... Popeye the Sailor Man and Mr. Peanut have to do with winning the war?" Johnson said.

Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., scoffed, "Spinach, shrimp, peanuts and shellfish? That's not a war-funding bill, that's the salad bar at Denny's."

In the days leading up to the vote, it seemed uncertain whether Pelosi and the Democratic leadership would be able to round up the votes needed to win approval of their proposal. Members of the more liberal wing of the party chafed at the idea of spending more on a war they think is no longer viable.

In the end, 14 Democrats voted against passage. Two Republicans — Wayne Gilchrest of Maryland and Walter Jones of North Carolina — joined the 216 Democrats who voted in favor of the bill.

The Washington state delegation voted along party lines, with all Democrats voting for it and all Republicans against.

Many Republicans argued that the legislation would handcuff commanders on the ground.

"It would be a tremendous mistake for the Congress of the United States to micromanage this war," said Jim McCrery, R-La.

But Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said, "The American public expects the Congress of the United States to do something. Not simply to say 'yes' to failed policies, but to, on their behalf, speak out and try to take us in a new direction."

Material from the Los Angeles Times and The Associated Press is included in this report.