(Photograph)
war spending: President Bush spoke about the supplemental funding bill during a recent visit to the American Legion Post 177 in Fairfax, Va.
kevin lamarque/reuters

The showdown in D.C. over Iraq war funding

In the end, Bush will get the $100-billion plus he has requested from Congress, key Democrats say.

Page 1 of 2

In the great showdown between the White House and congressional Democrats over war funding, it may be all over but the shouting.

Key Democrats – such as Senate Armed Services chair Carl Levin (D) of Michigan – have already made clear that President Bush will get his $100 billion-plus to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan this year.

Still, the usual Kabuki theater of antagonistic congressional-presidential relations is likely to play out: This week, the Democrat-controlled House and Senate are expected to negotiate a final bill on war funding that would set a timetable for troop withdrawal. On Wednesday, the Democratic leaders of the House and Senate will meet with Mr. Bush at the White House, where they will disagree on the timetable issue. Bush will veto Congress's bill. Then, lacking enough votes to override the veto, Congress will go back and pass a funding measure that the president is willing to sign.

Hard-line antiwar Democrats will be unhappy, but the party will have avoided the risk of being portrayed as harming US troops on the ground. And Democrats know that public opinion plays to their advantage; a majority of Americans favor a timetable for withdrawal. So even if the Democrats lose the current battle over the funding bill, they know the larger climate works in their favor.

"A lot of Americans would be happy if they learned that American troops would be leaving Iraq at a date certain," says Jack Pitney, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College in Claremont, Calif.

Lurking behind the latest battle between the White House and Congress is the memory of the 21-day government shutdown of 1995, when the Republican Congress and Democratic president, Bill Clinton, reached an impasse over the budget. Republicans, newly emboldened by their 1994 takeover of Congress, took the fight to President Clinton, who refused to back down. Ultimately, the public blamed the Republicans for the shutdown, which disrupted some government services.

Page 1 | 2 | Next Page

Related Stories
Get Monitor stories by e-mail:
(Your e-mail address will be protected by csmonitor.com's tough privacy policy.)
(Mary Knox Merrill/Staff)
EDITOR'S PICK Five cities that will rise in the New Economy
From Seattle to Huntsville, Ala., five cities are poised to prosper in the New Economy because of exports, innovation, clean technology, and healthcare.
POLITICS Patchwork Nation
The American voter beyond red and blue

Daily podcast

Monitor Reports

Discussions with Monitor reporters from around the world


Today

Peter Grier

The Monitor's Peter Grier talks with reporter Ron Scherer about how Black Friday will effect the economy this year.




Making a difference
Making a Difference

What happens when ordinary people decide to pay it forward? Extraordinary change. See how individuals are making a difference, finding solutions, overcoming adversity, and giving back globally.

Batdorj Gongor convinces residents to set up savings groups as a way of teaching them the power they gain by banding together in neighborhoods.

Lee Lawrence

People making a difference: Batdorj Gongor

In Mongolia, he shows former nomads how working together benefits everyone.