Skip navigation

Congress reluctantly approves billions for war

Democrats, conceding to Bush, don't insist on troop withdrawal timetable

IMAGE: NANCY PELOSI
Brendan Smialowski / Getty Images
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., speaks with reporters after the vote on Iraq war funding Thursday on Capitol Hill. "This debate will go on," she vowed.
NBC video
War bill OK'd
May 25: The U.S. Congress approves legislation that funds military operations in Iraq. NBC's Chip Reid reports.

Today show

NBC Video: Politics
Lawyer: 9/11 defendants want to air views
Nov. 22: According to the lawyer for one of the accused terrorists, the five men facing trial will plead not guilty so they can voice their criticisms of U.S. foreign policy. NBC’s Lester Holt reports.

Slideshow
Image: The Week in Political Cartoons
  The Week in Political Cartoons
Msnbc.com’s political cartoonists take a look back at the past week.

more photos

Interactive
Fight for Iraq
Learn more about the ethnic, religious and political power plays in and around Iraq during a briefing of the region led by NBC’s Richard Engel.
updated 12:47 p.m. ET May 25, 2007

WASHINGTON - Bowing to President Bush, the Democratic-controlled House and Senate reluctantly approved fresh billions for the Iraq war on Thursday, minus the troop withdrawal timeline that drew his earlier veto.

The Senate vote to send the legislation to the president was 80-14. Less than two hours earlier, the House had cleared the measure, 280-142, with Republicans supplying the bulk of the support.

Five months in power on Capitol Hill, Democrats in both houses coupled their concession to the president with pledges to challenge his policies anew. “This debate will go on,” vowed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, announcing plans to hold votes by fall on four separate measures seeking a change in course.

Story continues below ↓
advertisement | your ad here

From the White House to the Capitol, the day’s events closed out one chapter in an epic struggle pitting Congress against commander in chief over a war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,400 U.S. troops.

House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio choked back tears as he stirred memories of the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. “After 3,000 of our fellow citizens died at the hands of these terrorists, when are we going to take them on? When are we going to defeat them?” he asked.

The legislation includes nearly $95 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through Sept. 30. In addition to jettisoning their plan for a troop withdrawal timeline, Democrats abandoned attempts to require the Pentagon to adhere to troop training, readiness and rest requirements unless Bush waived them.

The bill establishes a series of goals for the Iraqi government to meet as it strives to build a democratic country able to defend its own borders. Continued U.S. reconstruction aid would be conditioned on progress toward the so-called benchmarks, although Bush retains the authority to order that the funds be spent regardless of how the Baghdad government performs.

Most Democrats voted against
In a highly unusual maneuver, House Democratic leaders crafted a procedure that allowed their rank and file to oppose money for the war, then step aside so Republicans could advance it. There were 194 Republicans in favor, as well as 86 Democrats, three members of the leadership among them. Pelosi and 139 other Democrats voted against the measure, as did two Republicans.

Moments earlier, the House voted 348-73 to include a separate package of domestic spending that Bush had once resisted.

After months of struggle with the White House, Democrats took credit for forcing Republicans to begin changing course. At the same time, they emphasized their distaste for enabling the money to advance.

“I hate this agreement,” said Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, who played a key role in talks with the White House that yielded the measure.

He voted against the money, but Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., no less an opponent of the conflict, cast a different vote.

“I cannot vote ... to stop funding for our troops who are in harm’s way,” said Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. “I simply cannot and I will not do that. It is not the proper way that we can bring this war to an end.”


Sponsored links

Resource guide