House Rebukes Bush on Iraq
17 Republicans Join 229 Democrats in Opposing Deployment of More Troops
By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, February 17, 2007; A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021600606_pf.html
Capping four days of passionate, often angry debate, the House yesterday delivered President Bush its first rebuke since the Iraq war was launched nearly four years ago, voting 246 to 182 to oppose the administration's planned deployment of 21,500 additional combat troops to Iraq.
Seventeen Republicans voted with all but two Democrats to approve a resolution that expresses support for U.S. combat forces but opposes the additional deployments. Democrats portrayed the vote as a bipartisan slap at the White House, but Republican leaders kept GOP defections below even their most optimistic estimates, as the debate crescendoed to a dramatic close yesterday.
Although the measure is nonbinding, proponents and opponents delivered outsized predictions of the vote's consequences. Democrats asserted that it will begin to turn the political tide so decisively that the president will have no choice but to begin bringing U.S. forces home, while Republicans warned darkly that the House has emboldened murderous Islamic terrorists at the expense not only of American lives but also of America's way of life.
"Our enemies will be the only ones satisfied by this debate," warned Rep. Eric Cantor (Va.), the Republicans' chief deputy whip. "They will have received all the political rhetoric they require to convince their followers that complete victory is at hand."
But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said that the resolution's passage "will signal a change in direction in Iraq that will end the fighting and bring our troops home safely and soon."
The Senate plans to hold an unusual weekend session today to vote on whether to proceed with a debate on the House-passed resolution. Although the resolution is merely an expression of lawmakers' views, Pelosi and other House Democrats have vowed to impose conditions on their support for Bush's war-funding request. Those stipulations could curtail troop deployments and alter the course of U.S. involvement in Iraq.
Bush did not publicly comment on the House vote, but White House press secretary Tony Snow said in a statement: "The president believes that the Congress should provide the full funding and flexibility our Armed Forces need to succeed in their mission to protect our country."
Some liberals and conservatives dismissed the House resolution as merely a symbolic gesture and said that Democratic leaders should have resorted to binding legislation if they were serious about stopping the troop buildup. But House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said that Bush would have vetoed such a bill, with no possibility of an override. The nonbinding resolution is not dependent on the president's signature.
"What the president cannot veto is the opinion of the Congress of the United States, the judgment of the Congress of the United States, the counsel of the Congress of the United States," Hoyer added, pounding on a lectern after the vote. "Let us hope that the commander in chief hears this counsel."
If anything, the Republicans were even more dramatic, as they concluded a debate that sent 393 of the House's 434 members -- 221 Democrats and 172 Republicans -- to the floor over a grueling 44 hours and 55 minutes.
House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) called the vote "the first step down a very treacherous path, a path that if followed will endanger Americans for decades to come."
As Pelosi delivered her closing remarks in the House chamber, Republican leaders abandoned the floor and crossed the Capitol to appear with their Senate counterparts and denounce what they called the Democrats' "slow-bleed strategy" for the war.
Still, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) noted, yesterday's House vote marked the first time Republicans in significant numbers have broken with Bush on the war. The 17 dissidents included longtime GOP foes of the war, such as Reps. Walter B. Jones (N.C.) and Ron Paul (Tex.), but also low-key backbenchers such as Reps. Timothy V. Johnson (Ill.) and Fred Upton (Mich.), staunch conservatives such as Reps. Bob Inglis (S.C.) and Howard Coble (N.C.), and moderates who usually stick with the leadership, such as Reps. Mark Steven Kirk (Ill.) and Phil English (Pa.).
Locally, Reps. Thomas M. Davis III (Va.) and Wayne T. Gilchrest (Md.) voted for the resolution, along with all of Maryland's and Virginia's Democrats.
Just two Democrats, Reps. Jim Marshall (Ga.) and Gene Taylor (Miss.) voted against the measure.
In contrast, a two-day debate in June over a pro-Bush Iraq war resolution drafted by House Republicans ended with 42 Democrats joining the Republicans. Just three Republicans broke rank then.
On Oct. 10, 2002, the House voted 296 to 133 to authorize Bush to go to war with Iraq, with 81 Democrats joining 215 Republicans to pass the measure.
GOP leaders said they did not pressure any of their members in yesterday's vote, nor did they count votes ahead of time. But behind the scenes, "there was tremendous pressure from the White House," said Davis, who added that he was bombarded with facts and information sheets pressing for a "no" vote.
A senior Republican lawmaker said that, at the start of the week, the GOP leadership expected to lose upward of 50 members, but that number dropped into the mid-30s by the middle of the week. After Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) went public with his plans to curtail troop deployments, the number dropped down into the teens, settling at 17 by the vote on Friday.
"I think Murtha absolutely exposed them for what they are," Cantor said. The longer the debate went on, he said, the more GOP leaders felt that their side was firming up against the resolution. "Murtha's announcement did it for us," Cantor added. "There was clearly a significant shift in the debate."
With public opinion turning firmly against the war, the Democrats believe they were in a no-lose situation politically. Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, reiterated a well-worn attack line when he said that Republicans had "rubber-stamped the president's failed policies in Iraq."
"There are a lot of people who clearly didn't get the message that the American people sent in the last election," he said. "Every constituent has a right to know where their members stood on this issue, and every constituent will know."
Democrats in the Senate face a similar political dynamic. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said yesterday that most Republicans will block a debate on the House-passed resolution until they are guaranteed a vote on a resolution opposing any effort to cut off funding for the war. He predicted that Democrats will muster nowhere near the 60 votes they would need today to move to a debate on the resolution opposing additional troop deployments.
Many Republicans will not bother to show up in the rare Saturday session. Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) will be campaigning for president in Iowa. A Democratic counterpart, Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), will be campaigning in South Carolina.
Democratic aides said that will only mean another round of newspaper headlines proclaiming that Republicans are blocking a debate on the war.
"Let us be clear," Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said, "anyone voting 'no' tomorrow is voting to give the president a green light to escalate the war."
Washingtonpost.com staff writer Paul Kane contributed to this report.
