Dems Feeling Spanked and Abused by Bush After Veto

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,269572,00.html

Dems Feel Pressure After Bush Veto
Wednesday, May 02, 2007

WASHINGTON - President Bush's veto of an Iraq war spending bill that set
timelines for U.S. troop withdrawals puts new pressure on Democrats in
Congress to craft a compromise even as their caucus grows more fractious on
the topic.

The party's most liberal members, especially in the House, say they will
vote against money for continuing the war if there's no binding language on
troop drawdowns. Bush and almost all congressional Republicans continue to
insist on a spending bill with no strings attached on troop movements.

Bush on Tuesday rejected legislation pushed by Democratic leaders that would
require the first U.S. combat troops to be withdrawn by Oct. 1 with a goal
of a complete pullout six months later.

"This is a prescription for chaos and confusion and we must not impose it on
our troops," Bush said in a nationally broadcast statement from the White
House. "It makes no sense to tell the enemy when you plan to start
withdrawing."

The standoff gives Republicans leverage, because even with the liberals'
votes, Democrats don't have enough support to override Bush's veto. It will
force Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., to seek more Republican help in
drafting a new bill that Bush might accept, her allies and opponents say.

"I think the Democrats are in a box," Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., said in an
interview Tuesday. "We're pretty resolute on our side. We are not going to
tie this funding to any type of withdrawal deadline or any type of
redeployment deadline."

Some Democrats believe the GOP solidarity will crack over time, noting that
polls show heavy public support for a withdrawal plan.

Lawmakers in both parties agree that a workable compromise is a huge
challenge in the coming days or weeks. Because Democrats control the House
and Senate, the pressure is mainly on them to craft a bill that Bush will
sign, and thus avoid accusations that they failed to finance troops in a
time of war.

Many Democrats say a new spending bill must include so-called benchmarks for
progress in Iraq that, if not met, would trigger movements of U.S. troops
out of the country or perhaps to non-urban areas that see little sectarian
violence. A new spending bill "has got to be tied to redeployment," said
Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., the House's fourth-ranking Democratic leader.

Emanuel conceded, however, that Democrats have yet to figure out where they
will find the votes.

The situation frustrates Democrats, who won control of the House and Senate
in an election that largely focused on Iraq.

Moreover, Democrats showed impressive solidarity in passing the bill that
Bush vetoed Tuesday, losing only 14 House Democrats while holding 216. Top
Democrats say they have no hope of replicating that showing once they begin
making even modest concessions in response to Bush's veto.

That makes them dependent on Republican help to some degree - perhaps a lot.
As long as most GOP lawmakers stick with the president, "the question is how
much policy and change we can push in Iraq," Emanuel said.

In his veto statement Tuesday, Bush again rejected the notion of an
"artificial deadline" for troop withdrawals. But he added, "I'm confident
that with good will on both sides we can agree on a bill that gets our
troops the money and flexibility they need, as soon as possible."

Pelosi, who was to join Republican and Democratic leaders from both houses
in a meeting with Bush on Wednesday, told reporters after Bush's remarks:
"The president wants a blank check. The Congress is not going to give it to
him."

Democrats will work with the White House, she said, "but there is great
distance between us right now."

Numerous possible compromises are being floated on Capitol Hill, all
involving some combination of benchmarks. Some would require Bush to certify
monthly that the Iraqi government is fully cooperating with U.S. efforts in
several areas, such as giving troops the authority to pursue extremists.
Others would require an Iraqi-run program to disarm militias and a plan to
distribute oil revenues fairly.

The key impasse in Congress is whether to require redeployments of U.S.
troops if the benchmarks are not met. Many Democrats insist on it, and many
Republicans vow not to budge.

"Our members will not accept restraints on the military," House Minority
Whip Roy Blunt of Missouri told reporters Tuesday. He suggested tying
benchmarks to continued U.S. nonmilitary aid to Iraq, an idea that many
Democrats consider too weak.

Under another proposal being floated, unmet benchmarks would cause some U.S.
troops to be removed from especially violent regions such as Baghdad. They
would redeploy to places in Iraq where they presumably could fight
terrorists but avoid the worst centers of Sunni-Shia conflict.

Still another possibility would change the bill that Bush vetoed only by
allowing the president to waive the redeployment requirements under certain
conditions

Senate Republicans show a bit more interest in compromise than do their
House colleagues, in part because several of them face tough re-elections
next year in competitive states.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky told reporters Tuesday
that his party will accept benchmarks. But he declined to say whether he
would agree to binding consequences if such benchmarks go unmet.

"You've asked me if there is an area where there's a potential common
ground," McConnell said, "and I think benchmarks are a possibility."



.

Loading