Senate panel approves bill to boost wartime spending

The Senate Appropriations Committee voted Thursday to send a $121.6 billion supplemental war spending bill to the Senate floor next week for what could be extended debate over Iraq withdrawal language and a myriad of domestic issues.

Mexican trucks, dairy subsidies and Medicaid reimbursement rates were among the issues raised at the committee markup Thursday. Senators also might seek to add additional farm conservation assistance and money to fix an 85-year-old lock on the Mississippi River.

Senate Democratic leaders want to complete work on the bill next week, but GOP objections to the Iraq language and unrelated spending might drag debate into the week following the chamber's one-week recess beginning April 2.

The White House issued a veto threat Thursday, as it did earlier on a House version that contains even more domestic spending and additional restrictions on unit deployments.

The watered-down Senate provision, which would set a goal of withdrawal by March 31, 2008, is similar to a resolution defeated last week on the Senate floor, 50-48.

"The Senate has already spoken on this issue. Inclusion of the language which does not have majority support in the Senate will only slow down the bill and invite a presidential veto," said Appropriations ranking member Thad Cochran, R-Miss., who plans to offer an amendment on the floor next week to strike the language.

Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., offered an amendment to that effect and then withdrew it during committee action Thursday. Republicans were outflanked because Democrats won support from Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., after changes were inserted mandating benchmarks for Iraqi politicians. Also, Budget ranking member Judd Gregg, R-N.H., wanted to be present for the debate but was tied up on the Senate floor with the budget resolution.

Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, who served in World War II, noted the Iraq war has now gone on longer than that war and implored members to support the bill. He stressed that the withdrawal date was a goal and not a mandate.

"What we need is a political solution," Inouye said. "We can stay in Iraq over the next year, or for five years, or for 10 years, fighting an effective civil war. But I'm certain we all realize that many of our brave men and women will continue to die, and many, many more will be coming home seriously wounded."

Republicans are also taking issue with the bill's cost, which is nearly $19 billion above the administration's request.

Office of Management and Budget Director Rob Portman said Thursday the White House would veto the bill if the Iraq language and additional spending remain in the bill. "We're disappointed the Senate is allowing politics to interfere with getting needed resources to our troops," he said.

Appropriations Chairman Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., invited the administration to pick a fight over the measure, which he said would refocus military and intelligence resources on fighting terrorists in Afghanistan while bolstering domestic needs.

"The White House has claimed that efforts to add funding for our veterans, for Katrina victims and for homeland security will hold hostage the funds for the troops," Byrd said. "What nonsense. What nonsense. Just more buzzwords."

Unrelated matters also arose during the markup. Over the objections of most panel Republicans, Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., successfully offered an amendment to impose a two-year moratorium on a proposed rule to limit Medicaid payments to government healthcare providers. The vote was 18-11, with four Republicans from affected states crossing the aisle. Durbin said 42 states are adversely impacted by the rule, which could cause his home state of Illinois to lose $635 million.

The amendment would offset the cost by increasing rebates that brand-name drug makers must pay to the federal government under Medicaid from 15 to 20 percent, saving roughly $1.35 billion. Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, equated the move to a tax increase, and Finance ranking member Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, whose panel has jurisdiction over Medicaid, pledged to fight the amendment.

Northeast and Midwest senators added a provision extending a dairy subsidy program for small farmers for one month to give it more favorable treatment during the upcoming farm bill debate. But larger farms in the West and their senators oppose the measure, arguing it forces their more efficient operations to subsidize non-competitive dairy farmers.

Backed by labor and highway-safety advocates, the panel unanimously adopted an amendment to delay a Bush administration plan to open the U.S. border to Mexican trucking companies, until similar safety standards on the Mexican side of the border are implemented. That could provoke the ire of free-traders on the floor next week, as it did six years ago when Congress first enacted safety benchmarks.

Agriculture Chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa., indicated he might try to add back nearly $2.9 billion in conservation assistance that was tapped three years ago to offset an earlier round of drought aid. And Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said she would seek to add roughly $600 million to fix a lock needed to close a shipping channel linking the port of New Orleans with the Gulf of Mexico, which critics say contributed to the storm surge that devastated the city in Hurricane Katrina.