House panel backs supplemental wartime spending bill

The House Appropriations Committee on Thursday approved a nearly $125 billion emergency bill for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan on a mostly party-line vote, highlighted by one of the House's most dedicated Iraq war opponents voting for it.

Financial Services Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., a member of the Out of Iraq Caucus and one of three House Democrats to vote for a measure last year to withdraw troops immediately from Iraq, supported the supplemental in what he called his most difficult vote during 33 years in public office. His decision might spur other antiwar Democrats to back leadership when the measure comes to the floor for a vote next week, though Serrano -- as a cardinal -- is expected to follow leadership.

"Some of my friends on the left are telling me that I sold out. In the Bronx they're ready to do what they have to do," Serrano said. But he acknowledged that even a decision to withdraw immediately could take months to implement, a process that the bill drafted by House Appropriations Chairman David Obey, D-Wis., and Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman John Murtha, D-Pa., would set in motion.

"I want this war to end. I don't want to go to any more funerals. So, I will take whatever heat is given ... and support this bill today and support it on the floor next week," Serrano said. Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., was the only Democrat to vote against it.

The underlying bill provides $95.5 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, adding $4 billion to President Bush's request for items such as military healthcare and readiness. It also puts restrictions on the use of funding to deploy troops not properly trained or equipped, while stipulating withdrawal from Iraq by next fall at the latest, based on the Iraq government meeting certain standards.

"I would say it puts Congress in the role of bad cop trying to deliver a message to the politicians in Iraq that we are not going to sit around forever watching them dither and then refuse to compromise while our troops continue to die as they're involved in an Iraqi civil war," Obey said.

Republicans argue the provisions would hamstring commanders in the field by "micromanaging" the war effort. Appropriations ranking member Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., and Defense Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member C.W. (Bill) Young, R-Fla., sought to turn up the heat by tying an amendment to strike the restrictions and withdrawal provisions to a resolution pledging not to cut off funding for troops in the field.

The amendment failed on a party-line vote, 37-27, and the panel adopted language instead expressing support for the troops while keeping in place the restrictions and withdrawal timeline.

Young then sought to stoke the fires even more by offering an amendment to fully fund an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, which has been sought by members of the Out of Iraq caucus. "I'm not going to vote for it, but let's find out where Congress really stands," Young said. The vote was unanimous against it.