 |
|
|
 News from Around the Americas | February 2007 
Democrats' New Strategy: Force Slow End to War
 John Bresnahan - Politico.com
| | House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., left, speaks to reporters outside The White House after meeting with President Bush about her January trip to Iraq and Afghanistan as Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., looks on. (AP/Charles Dharapak) |
Top House Democrats, working in concert with anti-war groups, have decided against using congressional power to force a quick end to U.S. involvement in Iraq, and instead will pursue a slow-bleed strategy designed to gradually limit the administration's options.
Led by Rep. John P. Murtha, D-Pa., and supported by several well-funded anti-war groups, the coalition's goal is to limit or sharply reduce the number of U.S. troops available for the Iraq conflict, rather than to openly cut off funding for the war itself.
The legislative strategy will be supplemented by a multimillion-dollar TV ad campaign designed to pressure vulnerable GOP incumbents into breaking with President Bush and forcing the administration to admit that the war is politically unsustainable.
As described by participants, the goal is crafted to circumvent the biggest political vulnerability of the anti-war movement - the accusation that it is willing to abandon troops in the field. That fear is why many Democrats have remained timid in challenging Bush, even as public support for the president and his Iraq policies have plunged.
Murtha and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., have decided that they must take the lead in pressuring not only Republicans but also cautious Senate Democrats to take steps more aggressive than nonbinding resolutions in challenging the Bush administration.
The House strategy is being crafted quietly, even as the chamber is immersed this week in an emotional, albeit mostly symbolic, debate over a resolution expressing opposition to Bush's plan to "surge" 21,500 more troops into Iraq.
Murtha, the powerful chairman of the defense subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, will seek to attach a provision to an upcoming $93 billion supplemental spending bill for Iraq and Afghanistan. It would restrict the deployment of troops to Iraq unless they meet certain levels adequate manpower, equipment and training to succeed in combat. That's a standard Murtha believes few of the units Bush intends to use for the surge would be able to meet.
In addition, Murtha, acting with the backing of the House Democratic leadership, will seek to limit the time and number of deployments by soldiers, Marines and National Guard units to Iraq, making it tougher for Pentagon officials to find the troops to replace units that are scheduled to rotate out of the country. Additional funding restrictions are also being considered by Murtha, such as prohibiting the creation of U.S. military bases inside Iraq, dismantling the notorious Abu Ghraib prison and closing the American detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
"There's a D-Day coming in here, and it's going to start with the supplemental and finish with the '08 (defense) budget," said Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, who chairs the Air and Land Forces subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee.
Pelosi and other top Democrats are not yet prepared for an open battle with the White House over ending funding for the war, and they are wary of Republican claims that Democratic leaders would endanger the welfare of U.S. troops. The new approach of first reducing the number of troops available for the conflict, while maintaining funding levels for units already in the field, gives political cover to conservative House Democrats who are nervous about appearing "anti-military" while also mollifying the anti-war left, which has long been agitating for Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to be more aggressive.
"What we have staked out is a campaign to stop the war without cutting off funding" for the troops, said Tom Mazzie of Americans Against Escalation of the War in Iraq. "We call it the 'readiness strategy.'"
Murtha's proposal, which has been kept under tight wraps, is likely to pass the House next month or in early April as part of the supplemental spending bill, Democratic insiders said, if the language remains tightly focused and does not threaten funding levels for combat forces already in the field. The battle will then shift to the Senate. Anti-war groups like Mazzie's are prepared to spend at least $6.5 million on a TV ad campaign and at least $2 million more on a grass-roots lobbying effort. Vulnerable GOP incumbents like Sens. Norm Coleman of Minnestoa, Susan Collins of Maine, Gordon Smith of Oregon and John Sununu of New Hampshire will be targeted by the anti-war organizations, according to Mazzie and former Rep. Tom Andrews, D-Maine, head of the Win Without War Coalition.
Mazzie also said anti-war groups would field primary and general election challengers to Democratic lawmakers who do not support proposals to end the war, a direct challenge to conservative incumbents who are attempting to straddle the political line between their pro- and anti-war constituents.
If the Senate does not approve these new funding restrictions, or if Senate Republicans filibuster the supplemental bill, Pelosi and the House Democratic leadership would then be able to ratchet up the political pressure on the White House to accede to their demands by "slow-walking" the supplemental bill. Additionally, House Democrats could try to insert the Murtha provisions into the fiscal 2008 defense authorization and spending bills, which are scheduled to come to the floor later in the year.
"We will set benchmarks for readiness," said a top Democratic leadership aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity. If enacted, these provisions would have the effect of limiting the number of troops available for the Bush surge plan, while blunting the GOP charge that Democrats are cutting funding for the troops. "We are not cutting funding for any (unit) in Iraq," said the aide, who admitted the Democratic maneuver would not prevent the president from sending some additional forces to Baghdad. "We want to limit the number who can go ... We're trying to build a case that the president needs to change course."
Mazzie, though, suggested that Democrats ought to directly rebut the Republican charge that Democrats are threatening the safety of American forces in the field by pushing restrictions on war funding. "Cutting off funding as described by the media and White House is a caricature," Mazzie said. "It has never happened in U.S. history, and it won't happen now."
Andrews, who met with Murtha on Tuesday to discuss legislative strategy, acknowledged "there is a relationship" with the House Democratic leadership and the anti-war groups, but added, "It is important for our members that we not be seen as an arm of the Democratic Caucus or the Democratic Party. We're not hand in glove."
Andrews's group has launched a new Web site, MoveCongress.org, and he has already posted an interview with Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif., one of the founders of the "Out of Iraq Caucus" in the House. An interview with Murtha on his legislative strategy will be posted on the site Thursday.
"I don't know how you vote against Murtha," said Andrews. "It's kind of an ingenious thing."
Democrats Enlist Help to Push Their Agenda
Alexander Bolton - The Hill
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), chairwoman of the Democratic Steering and Outreach Committee, will meet labor leaders today - an encounter that underscores the party's determination to work hand-in-hand with outside advocacy groups to raise public support for bills on the Democratic agenda.
The presidents of big labor unions will meet with Stabenow and other steering committee members such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Democratic Policy Committee Chairman Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), and Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) - the first such formal encounter since Democrats took control in January. It is intended to entrench labor as an electoral and legislative partner after 12 years of near-total GOP control.
"Labor's been a huge partner with Democrats during a lot of dark years when their agenda was not on the table," said a Democratic aide. "There will be a lot of agreement in that room, on moving forward on healthcare, on getting a hold on prescription drug costs. It's good to have a discussion on controlling the agenda and what we can accomplish."
Stabenow expected trade to be one of the labor presidents' highest priorities, along with the Employee Free Choice Act, which would make it easier to unionize workers.
When Democrats were in the minority, their steering committee was less active, keeping in touch with coalitions that make up the Democratic base or could become allies on specific issues. Organizing them, however, was difficult because Democrats rarely knew what Republicans would schedule on the Senate agenda.
"Now that we're in control and set the agenda, we're in position to bring people in as we move the agenda forward," Stabenow said in an interview. "We had a meeting with stem cell leaders as we're getting ready to work on stem cell legislation. The week after we get back we'll be doing the 9/11 recommendations, so we're doing a meeting with first responders" about a House-passed bill implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, which the Senate will take up immediately after the Presidents' Day recess.
That Wednesday, Democratic leaders will meet first responders and hold a press conference with them to gather momentum for pending floor business.
The following week, beginning March 5, the Senate will take up House stem cell legislation, said Stabenow, taking advantage of work Democrats did last week with leading advocates of federally funded stem cell research, including Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle (D).
When Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) headed the steering committee in the 109th Congress, it kept a relatively low public profile. Stabenow said the job used to be more difficult because "in the past we met with many different groups, but it was more in defense rather than offense."
She added that it will now "be relevant to what we're working on the floor. That's very helpful."
Panel meetings will not be limited to interest groups perceived as "Democratic," she said, but would forge ties with any group, such as first responders, for example, that could advance the party's agenda at a given time.
"We're talking to people on stem cells who aren't necessarily Democrats," she said, "They're coming together to help us move forward what I would call the American people's agenda."
A Democratic aide said, "The reality is we have an aggressive agenda. We have a lot of advocacy groups that care deeply about things that we want to pass and we need to work closely. We're going to need to get the action on the floor, but this is also about convincing the American public. It's time to convince them that we're really moving in a new direction."
The presidents of 14 to 15 major unions are expected to visit the Senate today. Kennedy said they want most to discuss agenda items that affect the middle class.
"We'll listen to what's on their agenda and what are their priorities," he said. Union leaders would likely press the leadership to pass the Employee Free Choice Act.
That would set up a fight with business interest groups. At a press briefing this year, leaders at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce vowed not to spare any effort opposing that legislation.
The union presidents may also criticize Senate Democrats for failing to pass a stand-alone bill to increase the national minimum wage. Despite strong pressure from House Democrats to keep the wage increase free of amendments, Senate Republicans successfully attached small-business tax cuts.
Kennedy said he was not troubled by that small Republican victory.
"I wanted a clean bill but ... the tax provisions were ones I voted to extend the last four years," he said. "I would probably vote for extension the next four. So if something's going to go on, that's not going to give me a lot of heartburn."
Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, has been less sanguine about the tax cuts. He has threatened to file a procedural objection, known as a "blue slip," against them, forcing Senate leaders to postpone further action. |
| |
|
Vallarta Weddings
Tell a Friend
Site Map
Print this Page
Email Us