Democrats Are Rethinking Year-End Budget Strategy

[question everything]

The Wall Street Journal

Democrats Are Rethinking Year-End Budget Strategy
By DAVID ROGERS
December 11, 2007 Page A6

WASHINGTON -- Democrats are rethinking their year-end budget strategy amid anger over White House veto threats and recriminations within the party over the suggestion that Congress is trading on the Iraq war to gain leverage for domestic spending. A $522 billion omnibus spending bill had been scheduled for a House vote Tuesday but House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D., Wis.) abruptly announced he will not file the package tonight and is recommending substantial revisions be made before it comes to the floor.


Mr. Obey said he is prepared to rewrite the package over the next few days, cutting billions from domestic programs and eliminating all home state projects or spending "earmarks" favored by lawmakers in both parties. But the Wisconsin Democrat made clear as well that Iraq would have to be dealt with separately and not as part of some year-end bargain in which Mr. Bush would relent on domestic spending in turn for war funding. "I'm not in the business of trying to pave the way for $70 billion or $90 billion for Iraq for $10 billion in table scraps," Mr. Obey said. "We asked Bush to compromise. He has chosen to go the confrontation route." "I want no linkage whatsoever between domestic and the war. I want the war to be dealt with totally on its own. We shouldn't be trading off domestic priorities for the war."

(snip)

No new money is provided directly for Iraq, but the bill takes major steps to ease the strain on the Army budget given the current impasse in Congress. The Pentagon would get an additional $31 billion for the war in Afghanistan as well as the purchase of "force protection" equipment, such as body armor, for all troops in the field. Behind the numbers is a concerted effort to add up to $17 billion to Army operations accounts, and thereby assure adequate funding into April next year when a fuller debate can be held on the U.S. future in Iraq. Despite these steps, the proposal has suffered from a clumsy introduction by top Democrats leaders and hostile reception from the White House, which issued a veto threat Saturday even before reading the bill. Administration officials said they felt compelled to issue the threat for fear of being seen as having agreed to a compromise without Republican support. And the back-and-forth underscores both the immense sensitivity of the Iraq war issue and also the White House's own weakness within its party on fiscal issues.

(snip)

Mr. Obey's anger seems directed not just at the administration but at some of his colleagues. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) was described by one top Democrat as "livid" after comments last week by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D., Md.) that triggered stories suggesting a year-end bargain trading unfettered war money for domestic funds. Liberal blogs Monday attacked the Democrats for engaging in any such tradeoff; while Mr. Obey said he was only speaking for himself, he had talked with Ms. Pelosi prior to his comments and often reflects her feelings as well. Monday night a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid signaled that the Nevada Democrat shared Mr. Obey's sentiments in response to the veto threat. "Actions have consequences," the spokesman said, "And unless some sort of reasonable compromise is reached, this may be where we are heading."

(snip)




URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119732663081520031.html (subscription)

[question everything]

1. self kick (nt)