House votes for more war funds in installments

updated 10:19 p.m. ET May 10, 2007

WASHINGTON - The Democratic-controlled House voted Thursday night to pay for military operations in Iraq on an installment plan, defying President Bush’s threat of a second straight veto in a fierce test of wills over the unpopular war.

The 221-205 vote, largely along party lines, sent the measure to a cool reception in the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is seeking compromise with the White House and Republicans on a funding bill.

Under increasing political pressure from Republicans, Bush also signalled flexibility, offering to accept a spending bill that sets out standards for the Iraqi government to meet.

“Time’s running out, because the longer we wait the more strain we’re going to put on the military,” said the president, who previously had insisted on what he termed a “clean” war funding bill.

Bush and key lawmakers have stepped up expressions of frustration with the government in Baghdad in recent weeks, and Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Barham Saleh spent his day in a series of meetings with key senators appealing for patience.

In a brief interview with The Associated Press, Saleh said the purpose of the meetings was to convey the “imperative of success against terrorism and extremism” in the Middle East.

NBC video Russert analysis May 10: NBC's Tim Russert talks with TODAY anchor Matt Lauer about Republicans' meeting with Bush on Iraq. Today show

Despite Bush’s ability to sustain his vetoes in Congress — the House upheld his rejection of a troop withdrawal timetable last week — Democrats called for votes on two separate bills Thursday that challenged him on the war.

“Democrats are not going to give the president a blank check for a war without end,” vowed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California.

'Flat wrong about Iraq'
The first measure would have required the withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from Iraq within nine months. It fell, 255-171, with 59 Democrats joining almost all Republicans in opposition.

“This war is a terrible tragedy and it is time to bring it to an end,” said Rep. James McGovern, leading advocate of the bill to establish a nine-month withdrawal timetable. “For four long, deadly years, this administration and their allies in Congress have been flat wrong about Iraq,” said the Massachusetts Democrat.

Republicans argued that a withdrawal would be disastrous.

“Now is not the time to signal retreat and surrender. How could this Congress walk away from our men and women in uniform,” said Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Calif.

A few hours later, the House passed legislation providing funds for the war grudgingly, in two installments. The first portion would cover costs until Aug. 1 — $42.8 billion to buy equipment and train Iraqi and Afghan security forces.

Under the bill, it would take a summertime vote by Congress to free an additional $52.8 billion, the money needed to cover costs through the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year.

“We reject that idea. It won’t work,” the president declared after a meeting with military leaders at the Pentagon.

MORE FROM POLITICS

Politics Section Front

Report: Health bill would reduce senior care NYT: Obama eyes cost of Afghan decision Obama, Medvedev see progress on nuke pact Chinese racist? Obama trip spurs talk   Medicare paid $47 billion in suspect claims 2012 already? GOP wannabes jockey early Obama: Congress should wait on Fort Hood GOP weekly address targets health strategy Palin's memoirs trigger a book boomlet Obama hints at Pacific Rim trade pact Politics Section Front   Add Politics headlines to your news reader: