House Democrats' New Strategy: Force Slow End to War By: John Bresnahan | politico.com | February 15, 2007 07:00 AM EST
Top House Democrats, working in concert with anti-war groups, have decided against using congressional power to force a quick end to U.S. involvement in Iraq, and instead will pursue a slow-bleed strategy designed to gradually limit the administration's options.
Led by Rep. John P. Murtha, D-Pa., and supported by several well-funded anti-war groups, the coalition's goal is to limit or sharply reduce the number of U.S. troops available for the Iraq conflict, rather than to openly cut off funding for the war itself.
The legislative strategy will be supplemented by a multimillion-dollar TV ad campaign designed to pressure vulnerable GOP incumbents into breaking with President Bush and forcing the administration to admit that the war is politically unsustainable.
As described by participants, the goal is crafted to circumvent the biggest political vulnerability of the anti-war movement -- the accusation that it is willing to abandon troops in the field. That fear is why many Democrats have remained timid in challenging Bush, even as public support for the president and his Iraq policies have plunged.
Murtha and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., have decided that they must take the lead in pressuring not only Republicans but also cautious Senate Democrats to take steps more aggressive than nonbinding resolutions in challenging the Bush administration.
The House strategy is being crafted quietly, even as the chamber is immersed this week in an emotional, albeit mostly symbolic, debate over a resolution expressing opposition to Bush's plan to "surge" 21,500 more troops into Iraq.
Murtha, the powerful chairman of the defense subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, will seek to attach a provision to an upcoming $93 billion supplemental spending bill for Iraq and Afghanistan. It would restrict the deployment of troops to Iraq unless they meet certain levels adequate manpower, equipment and training to succeed in combat. That's a standard Murtha believes few of the units Bush intends to use for the surge would be able to meet.
In addition, Murtha, acting with the backing of the House Democratic leadership, will seek to limit the time and number of deployments by soldiers, Marines and National Guard units to Iraq, making it tougher for Pentagon officials to find the troops to replace units that are scheduled to rotate out of the country. Additional funding restrictions are also being considered by Murtha, such as prohibiting the creation of U.S. military bases inside Iraq, dismantling the notorious Abu Ghraib prison and closing the American detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
"There's a D-Day coming in here, and it's going to start with the supplemental and finish with the '08 [defense] budget," said Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, who chairs the Air and Land Forces subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee.
The new approach of first reducing the number of troops available for the conflict, while maintaining funding levels for units already in the field, gives political cover to conservative House Democrats who are nervous about appearing "anti-military" while also mollifying the anti-war left, which has long been agitating for Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to be more aggressive.
Anti-war groups like Mazzie's are prepared to spend at least $6.5 million on a TV ad campaign and at least $2 million more on a grass-roots lobbying effort. Vulnerable GOP incumbents like Sens. Norm Coleman of Minnestoa, Susan Collins of Maine, Gordon Smith of Oregon and John Sununu of New Hampshire will be targeted by the anti-war organizations, according to Mazzie and former Rep. Tom Andrews, D-Maine, head of the Win Without War Coalition.
Mazzie also said anti-war groups would field primary and general election challengers to Democratic lawmakers who do not support proposals to end the war, a direct challenge to conservative incumbents who are attempting to straddle the political line between their pro- and anti-war constituents.
If the Senate does not approve these new funding restrictions, or if Senate Republicans filibuster the supplemental bill, Pelosi and the House Democratic leadership would then be able to ratchet up the political pressure on the White House to accede to their demands by "slow-walking" the supplemental bill. Additionally, House Democrats could try to insert the Murtha provisions into the fiscal 2008 defense authorization and spending bills, which are scheduled to come to the floor later in the year.
The Spineless Republicans at it Again Posted by Wordsmith on February 14, 2007 at 9:20 PM http://www.floppingaces.net/2007/02/14/the-spineless-republicans-at-i/ First in the Senate, and now infesting the House. From Victory Caucus: NRCC Main Number - (202) 479-7000 Congressman Cole's Office: Phone: 202-225-6165 Fax: 202-225-3512 Web Email Note: Rep. Cole's email form will not accept your email unless you enter a zip code that is within his Congressional district. That's no fair, particularly for a leader with a national job such as his. So use one of the following zip codes to make sure your message goes through: 73069 73501 74820 (you'll notice these are the zip codes of the three district offices that are listed below the comment form). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The most depressing --- and disturbing -- spectacle of this morning's House debates on the Democrats proposed resolution opposing the surge was the sight of a handful of Republican Representatives rising to speak in favor of the resolution. We've made a point here at The Victory Caucus to highlight those leaders who are standing firm on the war and who are committed victory: men like Senator Jim DeMint and Representative John Carter. Now, however, it is time to focus on those of our leaders who are chosing what they perceive (wrongly) to be the politically expedient course instead of what they must know is the right course. The reality of the mathematics in the House is grim: it is highly likely, if not certain, that the Democrats have sufficient votes to ensure that their resolution passes. Our goal, then, is to minimze its margin of passage: and in particular, to convince those who should know better --- our Republican members of Congress -- to do the right thing. I would therefore ask each of you to contact your own Representative, and ask their staff to go on-the-record stating that they will oppose the Democrats' resolution. If they refuse, ask why not, and express your disappointment in their decision. (You can find your Representative's web page and contact information here .) Once you have an answer --- and only a definitive, on-the-record "yes we will vote against the resolution" will do -- post the results of your conversation on this forum thread . We'll be collecting all the answers, and building up an organized list of those Republicans who are standing firm --- and those who need further encouragment to do what is right. Beyond your own Representative, I woudl also encourage you to contact all of the Representatives below. These are some of the Republican Representatives who rose today to speak against the troop surge, and in favor of the Democrats' resolution. Call them; fax them; email them, and make clear that to oppose the President's plan to win this war is simply unacceptable. Representative Walter Jones ☼ Phone: 202-225-3415 Fax: 202-225-3286 Web Email Representative Wayne Gilchrest ☼ Phone: 202-225-5311 Fax: 202-225-0254 Web Email Representative Michael Castle ☼ Phone: 202-225-4165 Fax: 202-225-2291 Web Email Representative Richard (Ric) Keller ☼ Phone: 202-225-2176 Fax: 202-225-0999 Web Email Representative Philip Sheridan English ☼ Phone: 202-225-5406 Fax: 202-225-3103 Web Email Representative Ronald Ernest Paul ☼ Phone: 202-225-2831 Web Email Representative Frederick Stephen Upton ☼ Phone: 202-225-3761 Fax: 202-225-4986 Web Email Updated: More info is coming in on additional Representatives who may be going wobbly. Please also contact those below: Representative Thomas M. Davis ☼ Phone: 202-225-1492 Fax: 202-225-3071 Web Email Representative Mark Kirk ☼ Phone: 202-225-4835 Fax: 202-225-0837 Web Email Representative Howard Coble ☼ Phone: 202-225-3065 Fax: 202-225-8611 Email: howard.coble AT mail.house.gov Web Email Representative John J. Duncan ☼ Jr. Phone: 202-225-5435 Fax: 202-225-6440 Web Email Representative James Ramstad ☼ Phone: 202-225-2871 Fax: 202-225-6351 Email: mn03 AT mail.house.gov Web Email Representative Steven C. LaTOURETTE Phone: 202-225-5731 Fax: 202-325-3307 Web Email Be polite and professional, but give 'em a mouthful. They deserve that, and more. For those who vote for the resolution: That's one thing. But how shameful for House Republicans who also stand up and vocally side with the surrender resolution. The anti-war left has always been able to make a lot of noise. It's time to lay into our Republican leadership, and let 'em know how the conservative base really feels. We should not tolerate weak-kneed defeatist Republicans, gladly. Show them the door in the next Election for breaking the trust of the American people; Threaten to cut off their funding for the '08. When it comes to national security, it is the Republican Party that has been serious about keeping America safe. What happens when both parties are serious no more? Who will defend us, then?