Republicans' Bill Challenges Iraq Policy

Republicans' Bill Challenges Iraq Policy

A small group of Republican senators, led by Virginia's John Warner, are coalescing around legislation that would threaten billions of dollars in U.S. aid to Iraq and make clear American troops will stay only as long as Baghdad lives up to its promises.

"The United States strategy in Iraq, hereafter, shall be conditioned on the Iraqi government meeting benchmarks," a draft of the proposal says.

The Senate was to vote on the proposal Wednesday, along with two Democratic anti-war measures.

The GOP legislation does not go as far as many Democrats want, but it offers a sharp challenge to Bush's Iraq policy by members of his own political party. It also indicates the thinning patience of many GOP members on a deeply unpopular and costly war in its fifth year.

"I think the reconstruction money has shown to have been mishandled and a large part of it has probably been wasted," said Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., who was expected to back the measure. "I think before we send in more money ... we should make sure it's been spent well."

GOP Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine and Norm Coleman of Minnesota also were working with Warner, former chairman of the Armed Services Committee, to draft the legislation and were expected to support it.

Under the proposal, the president would have to certify that Baghdad was making "satisfactory progress" on political and security reforms or cut off U.S. aid. However, the president would be allowed to waive the restriction. Bush requested about $2 billion in economic assistance for Iraq through September.

The measure also would require troop deployments if the Iraqi government passes a resolution calling for a U.S. withdrawal.

Warner's proposal comes as Democrats try to find a way to fund the troops without giving Bush a blank check on the war. Earlier this month, Bush vetoed $124.2 billion legislation that would have paid for operations through September but demanded troops start coming home on Oct. 1.

Unsure what would pass the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid staged a series of test votes for Wednesday.

In addition to Warner's measure, the Senate was to vote on legislation by Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., that would cut off funding for combat operations after March 31, 2008. It also was to vote on a measure ordering troop withdrawals to begin Oct. 1, but that would allow the president to waive that requirement.

The Democratic proposals were expected to fall short of the 60 votes needed to advance under Senate rules, but would gauge the tolerance of members on anti-war legislation.

"I think (the votes) are going to tell us the relative strength we have on these issues, particularly with the so-called moderate Republicans," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. "The ball is in their court."

With Iraq dominating the 2008 presidential campaign, two Democratic candidates, Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton, on Tuesday declared their support for the March 31, 2008, cutoff of war funds. Another candidate, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., had urged his White House rivals to join him in backing the cutoff date.

Obama said he would vote for the cutoff as well as a second bill setting standards for the Iraqi government "not because I believe either is the best answer, but because I want to send a strong statement to the Iraqi government, the president and my Republican colleagues that it's long past time to change course."

Clinton said she would cast her vote "to send the president a clear message that it is time to change course, redeploy our troops out of Iraq and end this war as soon as possible," said Philippe Reines, a spokesman in her Senate office.

Like Obama, Clinton voted against a proposal in the Senate last June to require the withdrawal of all combat troops from Iraq by July 1, 2007.

While most Republicans are expected to buck legislation that sets a firm timetable on the war, so will at least one Democrat. Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., said he would not vote for either proposal. Nelson told reporters Tuesday that he voted reluctantly for the earlier bill that Bush vetoed just to move the process along.

But this time around, he said, "I can't see setting dates of withdrawal or consequences if you don't see the report card first."

Nelson has drafted a proposal similar to Warner's measure.

The Senate debate Wednesday was occurring as the House takes up legislation that authorizes $645.6 billion in defense programs for 2008. That bill does not demand troop withdrawals in Iraq and is widely supported by Republicans.

Among the some 50 amendments to be debated was a measure intended to prevent a potential military strike against Iran without congressional authorization.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/05/16/ap3725959.html