View Mobile Site

Democrats out-of-Iraq measure clears Senate hurdle, but Republicans say they can stop it

WASHINGTON — Democratic-backed legislation to withdraw U.S. combat troops from Iraq cleared an initial Senate hurdle Wednesday, but Republicans confidently predicted they had the votes to defeat it. President Bush backed them up with a veto threat.
    The legislation, calling for combat troops to return home over the next 12 months, ‘‘would hobble American commanders in the field and substantially endanger America’s strategic objective of a unified federal democratic Iraq,’’ the White House said in a written statement.
    The strong veto message underscored the intensifying struggle between the administration and the new Democratic-controlled Congress, which is determined to end U.S. participation in a war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,100 Americans and cost more than $300 billion.
    Democrats in the House and Senate are advancing different bills calling for the withdrawal of troops, and Bush has threatened to veto both.
    In the House, Democratic leaders said during the day they were building support behind legislation to require the withdrawal of troops by Sept. 1, 2008, if not sooner. That plan faces its first test vote Thursday in the Appropriations Committee.
    By contrast, the Senate measure lacks a firm deadline for an end to U.S. participation in combat. It says a withdrawal should begin within 120 days, ‘‘with the goal of redeploying, by March 31, 2008, all United States combat forces from Iraq except’’ for those needed for non-combat roles.
    The only Iraq-related vote of the day was an 89-9 procedural roll call that cleared the way for a formal debate on the legislation in the Senate.
    Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., said the legislation does not go far enough, but added he intends to support it because ‘‘it does not allow the president’s misguided policies to continue. It does not tacitly re-authorize the war.’’ The Wisconsin Democrat said he would keep trying to press his own measure, which calls for limiting the use of defense funds in Iraq to achieving a troop withdrawal.
    Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., another vocal critic of the war, said, ‘‘The American people are far ahead of the administration. We have an obligation to stand up for our troops and stand up to our president when he stubbornly refuses to change course in Iraq.’’
    But Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said passage of the withdrawal measure ‘‘would be absolutely fatal to our mission in Iraq’’ — and he sought to rebut Democratic supporters with their own words.
    He quoted Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada as saying in 2005 that setting a timeline was ‘‘not a wise decision because it only empowers those who don’t want us there, and it doesn’t work well to do that.’’
    McConnell also quoted Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y. as having said in September 2005: ‘‘I don’t believe it’s smart to set a date for withdrawal. I don’t think you should ever telegraph your intentions to the enemy so they can await you.’’
    Democrats who have made similar comments ‘‘know just as well as I do that this is what the terrorists have been waiting for — and just what our allies in Iraq and the entire region of the world have feared,’’ McConnell said.
    Reid is the party’s point man for the legislation pending in the Senate.
    ‘‘To take a statement that I made five years ago, to think that things haven’t changed in five years is without any degree of sensibility,’’ he responded to McConnell a few moments later on the Senate floor.
    Senate Republicans had previously thwarted two attempts to hold a full-fledged debate over the war, accusing Democrats of failing to give equal treatment to GOP alternatives. The result was unease among some members of the GOP rank-and-file, who feared they would be tagged with trying to block debate on the most pressing issue facing the country.
    Republicans also have concluded they can derail the measure when it comes to a final vote.
    Despite the legislation’s dim prospects, Democrats insisted the developments marked progress toward their eventual goal of forcing the president to end U.S. participation in the war.
    Democrats hold a shaky majority in the Senate. And with Sen. Joseph Lieberman, an independent Democrat, expected to oppose the measure and Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota recuperating from a brain hemorrhage, Reid said on Monday he was not certain whether even a bare majority would support the legislation.
    Earlier jockeying had occurred around a nonbinding measure that criticized Bush’s decision to increase the number of troops in Iraq. Several Republicans had appeared ready to support that measure. In contrast, Republican aides said any defections on the legislation containing a timetable for withdrawal would be far fewer in number — and perhaps none at all.

Interested in viewing premium content?

A subscription is required before viewing this article and other premium content.

Already a registered member and have a subscription?

If you have already purchased a subscription, please log in to view the full article.

Are you registered, but do not have a subscription?

If you are a registed user and would like to purchase a subscription, log in to view a list of available subscriptions.

Interested in becoming a registered member and purchasing a subscription?

Join our community today by registering for a FREE account. Once you have registered for a FREE account, click SUBSCRIBE NOW to purchase access to premium content.

Membership Benefits

  • Instant access to creating Blogs, Photo Albums, and Event listings.
  • Email alerts with the latest news.
  • Access to commenting on articles.

Please wait ...