Democrats Drop Timeline, Pork from Iraq Supplemental

In grudging concessions to reality, the Democratic leaders in Congress have decided to punt and play defense on the Iraq supplemental:

President Bush, Democrats intend to draft an Iraq war-funding bill without a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops and shorn of billions of dollars in spending on domestic programs, officials said Monday. The legislation would include the first federal minimum wage increase in more than a decade, a top priority for the Democrats who took control of Congress in January, the officials added. While details remain subject to change, the measure is designed to close the books by Friday on a bruising veto fight between Bush and the Democratic-controlled Congress over the war. It would provide funds for military operations in Iraq through Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.

Now, was that so hard?

Democrats in both houses are expected to seek other opportunities later this year to challenge Bush’s handling of the unpopular conflict.

Imagine that!

FILED UNDER: Congress, Iraq War, , ,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor and Department Head of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College and a nonresident senior fellow at the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm vet. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. Dave Schuler says:

    See my comment under Steve Verdon’s peak oil post above.

    This situation is perfect for Congressional Democrats. They can make fiery speeches about the evils of the Bush Administration, that we were led into war under false pretenses, and that we should withdraw from Iraq immediately. Next week! Tomorrow!

    They will get all of the benefits of support from their constituencies and, as long as they don’t plan actually to do anything about it, will have to bear none of the consequences of either blame for the ongoing situation in Iraq or for the consequences of our leaving Iraq before things are more stable there than they are now.

    What will their “withdraw now” constituents do? Vote for Republicans? Stay home and let (gasp!) Republicans be elected? Not on your flameless cooker.

    It’s perfect.

  2. jpe says:

    What will their “withdraw now” constituents do?

    Mount primary challenges; not vote; or vote for Greens.

  3. Dave Schuler says:

    Mount primary challenges; not vote; or vote for Greens.

    Uh huh. As I said, they’ll vote for the Democrats on the ballot (90%+ of whom will be incumbents) or Republicans will be elected.

  4. jpe says:

    Those that are truly inflamed about Iraq, actually, won’t vote for Dems that don’t take a hardline stance. They’ll be in the same position that pro-life zealots will be in if Giuliani wins the (R) nomination.

  5. Dave Schuler says:

    No true Scotsman…

  6. Perhaps we could call it the Lieberman Paradox.

  7. Anjin-San says:

    Now, was that so hard?

    Well, it is for the folks who are going to be killed in Iraq. But, I foget, Bushies are not losing any sleep over that.