A somber mood in the House
NBC VIDEO |
Congress debates Iraq resolution Feb. 13: House lawmakers debate the non-binding Iraq resolution that would oppose the Bush plan to send more troops to war. MSNBC |
War-ending measures
Asked to assess the debate’s impact on Bush, Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., a freshman who won last November largely due to the war, said the president had seemed “still very dug in” when he addressed House Democrats at their retreat two Saturdays ago. Courtney saw in Bush “no flicker of acknowledgment that he would change.”
Despite being elected on a wave of discontent with the war, Courtney signaled that he is not yet ready to support war-ending measures such as the one to be offered by Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y. that would require Bush to withdraw the troops by Dec. 31 of this year.
Instead Courtney is sympathetic to the “readiness” approach of Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa. who wants to find a way to condition funding for the troops on the Army chief of staff certifying that specific units bound for Iraq have sufficient training and equipment before they go.
Among people opposed to the war back in Connecticut is there a rising expectation that Congress will actually cut off funds and end the war? “There’s disagreement even within the anti-war community on how to handle the ($100 billion) supplemental (spending request),” Courtney noted.
He said some Moveon.org activists in his district recently said, “We can’t just leave” Iraq.
How will Courtney vote on the supplemental if the Senate forces House leaders to remove the Murtha “readiness” conditions and it becomes a bare, up-or-down vote on the $100 billion?
“I’ll jump off that bridge when I come to it, or whatever that saying is,” Courtney said, with a note of black humor.
A push to cut off funding
Also voicing some pessimism, but with more passion, was Democratic presidential contender Rep. Dennis Kucinich – who ran for his party’s nomination exactly four years on his opposition to the Iraq war.
|
“What this means is we pass the non-binding resolution, yet Congress is not truly exercising its authority to end this war. The only way Congress can do that is by cutting off funds,” Kucinich said. “Once the president gets the supplemental he’ll have enough money to continue the war to the very end of his term – and enough money to attack Iran.”
Almost every one of the 233 Democrats in the House is likely to vote for the non-binding resolution. A rare exception is Rep. Jim Marshall of Georgia.
Just before stepping on to the House floor Marshall said the resolution “cannot help our effort in Iraq. It might not hurt, but it could – by telling our soldiers Congress doesn’t think it’s a good idea for them to be doing what they’re doing.”
Marshall warned of the consequences pulling out American troops. “Many of those who want troops pulled out will be terribly upset by the slaughter that will occur as a consequence.”
In his view, the United States “ignited this” situation in Iraq by toppling Saddam Hussein. The United States “has a moral obligation to try to see this through.”
Marshall said, “It’s not going to be a popular vote” when he breaks from most other Democrats to vote against the resolution.
Democratic leaders seemed eager to assure their members that, for now, funding of the war will not be ended.
As the House Rules Committee approved the non-binding resolution Monday night, a veteran Democrat on the committee Rep. Alcee Hastings of Florida pledged that the resolution was “not a first step to cut off funding of the troops.”
Majority Leader Steny Hoyer re-affirmed that up in a briefing for reporters before the Iraq debate started Tuesday, “We’re going to fund the troops… there will be no de-funding of troops in the field, no de-funding which will cause any risk to the troops.”
- Discuss Story On Newsvine
-
Rate Story:
View popularLowHigh - Instant Message
MORE FROM POLITICS |
| Add Politics headlines to your news reader: |
Sponsored links
Resource guide




