Iraq Appropriations Politics

This Fall, Democrats in Congress will finally get their say on Iraq.

President Bush recently got what he wanted -- a timetable removed from an Iraq emergency supplemental appropriations bill. Democrats fought for timetables and sure benchmarks. They ultimately caved, leaving many rank-and-file Democrats terribly angry.

The results of November's Congressional elections, if anything, were meant to cause a change in Iraq policy on Capitol Hill. That the House and Senate would give President Bush all of the funding he needs to conduct the war exactly how he wants without any binding requirements was a big blow

But the fight for the emergency appropriations bill is nothing in comparison to what's going to happen when the real, regular Iraq appropriations bill comes up this September

In September, General Petraeus has promised a report on the results of this summer's surge. And Petraeus and the Bush Administration have said that they'll determine what to do with U.S. involvement in Iraq based on the results of this report.

But recent news reflects clearly that the surge isn't saving Baghdad, and the American forces in Iraq can't really change the general dynamic of civil war there.

So it's no surprise that General Odierno is saying that it's going to take more time to issue the report. And no surprise that today Ambassador Crocker would say that it will take a lot longer than September to see results in Iraq.

Of course, you could wait forever for positive results in Iraq without seeing any, but that's beside the point. We're talking about September's appropriations bill for next year's war operations.

No amount of spin or attempting to recast the debate can get the President out of asking Congress for money. And he's going to have to ask around September in order to actually have the appropriations process work.

Without magnificent success to show for the surge, the President is going to have to announce a significant change of course in Iraq. A few different initiatives have been floated -- a 50% cut in troops in Iraq during 2008, and an endorsement of the Baker-Hamilton Report. President

As much as the President didn't agree with the results of the Iraq Study Group Report, it doesn't require the President to do much besides attempt to engage Iraq's neighbors in dialogue. A dialogue that can be ongoing, fruitlessly, while the President stays the course, with a little window-dressing, in Iraq. And don't forget, the Iraq Study Group explicitly did not include any timelines in their Report.

Let's say what it really is: President Bush's "endorsement" of the Iraq Study Group's recommendations would be a transparent play for time. So I believe this will be the core of what President Bush will propose along with his request for war funding this Fall.

Democrats in Congress cannot be satisfied with an Administration that simply states that it will adhere by the terms of the Baker-Hamilton Report. Letting the Administration off without more would damage their own credibility and truly alienate the Democratic base.

The Democrats will include a harsh timetable, one with teeth, in September. They will limit the President's license to carry out the war. And they will take steps that will lead to a drawdown in U.S. forces in Iraq. The need for money to continue the war, and Democrats' unwillingness to give it without strings, means that the President will have to accept changes. The only question is whether these changes will be entirely on his initiative or not. And based on the President's lack of creativity in Iraq policy, the answer will be "not."

The other alternative being floated -- a 50% cut in U.S. forces during 2008 -- reflects not what the President wants but what he will likely have to accept. Floating this idea is only the President looking forward to 2008 and trying not to look like he was politically defeated. It is not a positive initiative to win the war.

In light of the situation that will likely exist in September, the question for Democrats should be, "what conditions should we place on the President's conduct of the war in Iraq," and "what is the right way to withdraw the large majority of American forces from Iraq during 2008 and possibly 2009?"

These are difficult questions that must be taken very seriously. Up to this point, posturing and posing on Capitol Hill has been no problem because in the end everyone knew that Congress wasn't going to upset the war-funding applecart. This time, however, Congress is likely to get most of what it asks for.