Decision ‘08

The Death Of The Murtha Plan?

It appears ’slow-bleed’ may be out, in favor of ‘we really didn’t mean it’:

Senate Democratic leaders intend to unveil a plan next week to repeal the 2002 resolution authorizing the war in Iraq in favor of narrower authority that restricts the military’s role and begins withdrawals of combat troops.

House Democrats have pulled back from efforts to link additional funding for the war to strict troop-readiness standards after the proposal came under withering fire from Republicans and from their party’s own moderates. That strategy was championed by Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) and endorsed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

“If you strictly limit a commander’s ability to rotate troops in and out of Iraq, that kind of inflexibility could put some missions and some troops at risk,” said Rep. Chet Edwards (D-Tex.), who personally lodged his concerns with Murtha.

In both chambers, Democratic lawmakers are eager to take up binding legislation that would impose clear limits on U.S. involvement in Iraq after nearly four years of war. But Democrats remain divided over how to proceed. Some want to avoid the funding debate altogether, fearing it would invite Republican charges that the party is not supporting the troops. Others take a more aggressive view, believing the most effective way to confront Bush’s war policy is through a $100 billion war-spending bill that the president ultimately must sign to keep the war effort on track.

Last week, the House approved a nonbinding resolution that criticized President Bush’s decision to deploy an additional 21,500 troops, but the measure was blocked in the Senate by Republicans during a rare Saturday session. It is highly possible that Senate Democrats will encounter the same procedural roadblock in attempting to push through another resolution, in particular one with real teeth.

Highly possible, indeed…but let’s gloat, er, go back to the details on the death of Plan Murtha:

House Democratic leaders are likely to present a proposal for binding legislation to the Democratic caucus next week, according to lawmakers in that chamber. But lawmakers and senior Democratic aides said the Murtha plan would have to be scaled back dramatically, after a week-long Republican assault.

Murtha, chairman of the Appropriations defense subcommittee and a leading critic of the war, had intended to fully fund Bush’s $100 billion war request for the remainder of this fiscal year. But under his plan, those funds could be spent only to deploy combat troops who were deemed fully rested, trained and equipped.

After nearly four years of combat, most military units would not be able to meet those standards. Although the war would be fully funded, the policy would prevent some of the 21,500 additional combat troops from being deployed, and some troops already in Iraq would have to be sent home.

But that approach may be all but dead, according to several Democratic lawmakers. Murtha doomed his own plan in part by unveiling it on a left-wing Web site, inflaming party moderates.

“Congress has no business micromanaging a war, cutting off funding or even conditioning those funds,” said Rep. Jim Cooper (Tenn.), a leading Democratic moderate, who called Murtha’s whole effort “clumsy.”

Cooper’s position underscores the challenges now facing the House Democratic leadership. While the caucus’s liberal wing is demanding legislation to end the war almost immediately, moderates such as Cooper say Congress should focus on oversight of the war and stay away from legislation that encroaches on the war powers of the president.

“I think Congress begins to skate on thin ice when we start to micromanage troop deployments and rotations,” said Texas’s Edwards, whose views reflect those of several other Democrats from conservative districts.

What’s that smell? It ain’t over ’til it’s over, but I’m catching a whiff of victory…and yes, I’m aware the victory will be hollow if the surge doesn’t come through…but forgive this Republican for a moment or two of deep, deep satisfaction…

3 Responses to “The Death Of The Murtha Plan?”

1 Wake up America Says:
February 23rd, 2007 at 1:03 pm
If They Shoot At You, Don’t Shoot Back…Unless

“Congress has no business micromanaging a war, cutting off funding or even conditioning those funds,” said Rep. Jim Cooper (Tenn.), a leading Democratic moderate, who called Murtha’s whole effort “clumsy.”
2 jpe Says:
February 23rd, 2007 at 1:31 pm
That’s a prettttty stupid thing to say, Wake Up America. The new AUMF won’t prevent self-defense actions. There’s plenty of room for people of good faith to debate the issues honestly.
3 A Blog For All Says:
February 23rd, 2007 at 8:55 pm
Senate Democrat Fecklessness Continues

Not a single Senator who supports this nonsense can defend it on grounds of national security. Not a single one. How does limiting the President’s capabilities as commander in chief improve national security? How does limiting the military’s capabili…