For some months, Democrats have been trying to force an end to the war in Iraq without being blamed by the public for cutting off funds for the troops. Given the resolve of President Bush to continue the mission however, it’s clear that eventually the Democrats will have to choose. They must either force an end to the Iraq mission by not funding it, or admit to their base that they are unwilling to take that political risk. The suggestion from some House Democrats that they plan a short-term funding measure is clearly a step toward cutting off funds. Some may argue that this is a bridge to full funding, but this isn’t the pattern that Congress uses in such cases. If the Congressional leadership intends to fully fund… something, and face a deadline to do so, the bridge funding–typically a continuing resolution–is introduced late in the process, shortly before the deadline. This keeps the pressure on for quick action on the regular appropriations bill. Further, the CR is short term, to ensure that the pressure remains on to the greatest extent possible. Thus, if House leaders intended to give the troops the support they need, there would be no talk (yet) of a short-term measure. Rather, House leaders would say that right after the first supplemental is vetoed, they will turn to work on a new version. They would not yet discuss the CR. Thus the very mention of a short-term measure confirms what ought to be obvious: House leaders are now considering cutting off funds. But while the House may want to go this route, the president and the Senate are clearly not thrilled with it. From Roll Call ($):
Emanuel will have to come up with a better defense of the House’s actions. He seems to think that because he disagrees about the deadline for funding the troops, there is no deadline. He ought to be aware that Senate Democrats identified May 1 as the date by which the money is needed to avoid impacting Pentagon operations. So if Emanuel has a problem with Portman’s credibility, he might want to correct Senator Byrd as well. And while the loyal opposition’s leaders on the Hill consider strategy, what is their base asking them to do? According to one liberal bellwether, Bush is treating U.S. troops as hostages, and Democrats must refuse to yield even an inch. Others are arguing that Reid and Pelosi simply need to make clear that after a given date, there will be no additional funding. I suspect that House Democrats will be unable to win on their effort to kick the can down the road by offering a short-term funding measure. They’ll then have to decide whom they will disappoint–their base, or moderate voters.
