Pelosi’s War Bill Pitch Gets Personal
By Jonathan Allen, CQ Staff
CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS
June 10, 2009 – 9:10 p.m.
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000003140209
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is fiercely lobbying fellow anti-war Democrats, crossing off the names of converts from a whip list as she seeks to build support for a troubled supplemental war-spending bill.
Even with her leverage — and there is no doubt the Speaker is the heavy in the party leadership — the veteran California Democrat’s task is tough.
The bill (HR 2346) is hamstrung by the inclusion of $5 billion to support lending by the International Monetary Fund.
“She’s working it, and she usually gets her way,” said Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman John P. Murtha , D-Pa. “She’s the most important asset that [President] Obama has.”
Republicans are threatening to oppose the bill en bloc to protest the inclusion of the IMF money — a possibility Democrats are taking seriously even if it may not be carried out.
On Wednesday evening, Pelosi was working the floor during votes on a separate bill authorizing foreign aid funding (HR 2410), trying to find the remaining votes needed for the $100 billion-plus war supplemental from among the 51 Democrats who voted against the bill when the House passed its version in mid-May.
Pelosi’s hands-on effort to flip the votes of her liberal base is indicative of the difficulty Democratic leaders have had in bringing their caucus together in support of Obama’s escalation of the war in Afghanistan. Some lawmakers contend the conflict offers no positive outcome.
Earlier this week, the Speaker approached Rep. Marcy Kaptur , an Ohio progressive who sits on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, and asked Kaptur to reconsider her “no” vote.
Rather than making a case based on the policy, Kaptur said, the Speaker asserted that Obama and congressional Democrats needed to clear the decks of “the last old business” left over from the Bush administration.
Kaptur was unmoved.
“I don’t agree with her analysis that we’re cleaning up for Bush,” said Kaptur, who worries that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are too costly and that the administration lacks a plan for success in Afghanistan. “This is Obama’s first chance. This is his first wave.”
The conference report on the supplemental spending bill is not expected to reach the House floor until at least June 16, according to key Democrats. The leadership was confounded this week in its efforts to bring up the bill to a final House vote by a combination of vote-gathering, scheduling and policy-making complications.
Most of the Democrats who voted against the war-funding bill in May are war critics. But for every Democrat Pelosi has used the IMF funding as an enticement to win their support the underlying bill — House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank , D-Mass., among them — there seems to be at least one more whose resistance is actually exacerbated by the IMF money.
Lawmakers say it’s hard for longtime war critics to justify voting for ramping-up U.S. forces in Afghanistan, no matter what other policies are included.
“I made a commitment to my constituents that I wouldn’t vote for funding to escalate wars,” said Rep. Yvette D. Clarke , who represents a liberal Brooklyn district.
In addition to concerns over the IMF funding, the measure’s fate had been complicated by the insistence of Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman , a Connecticut independent, and Lindsey Graham , a South Carolina Republican, that it include a prohibition on the release of additional photos of detainees being abused in American custody.
Many liberals back the release of photos under the Freedom of Information Act, though the administration opposes such a move. Rep. Louise M. Slaughter , D-N.Y., chairwoman of the Rules Committee, said the prohibition would not be included in the final legislation.
Democrats say they expect Pelosi, whose efforts are complemented by South Carolina Rep. James E. Clyburn ’s official whip operation and arm-twisting by White House officials, to get the votes needed.
Still, the process has been slow going, and Democrats have had to cast a wide net to capture commitments.
Rep. Michael M. Honda , a California Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, said he has been contacted by a member of the president’s lobbying team.
“I told people at first blush ‘No, I’m not changing my mind,’ just to maintain some space,” Honda said. “I’m looking at it.”
Honda said the argument that has been pushed to him is that the president needs help. But, he said, he doesn’t think the president’s standing or momentum would be diminished by a “no” vote.
The House passed the supplemental, 368-60, on May 14 — but that version did not include the IMF funding.
Another reason some Democrats are still wavering may be because final touches are still being put on several provisions in the measure. Without a final product in hand, many lawmakers are reluctant to commit.
Conferees are scheduled to meet on Thursday.
The universe of potential vote-switchers primarily comes from the party’s most liberal faction. And even if they want to support Pelosi and the president, their concerns about increased U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq greatly restrict their support for additional funding.
Knowing that it will be tough for Republican leaders to hold a line against the war-spending bill if Democrats eventually summon enough votes to pass the bill on their own, Kaptur made this pledge to Pelosi: “I said, ‘I won’t vote early.’”
CQ © 2007 All Rights Reserved | Congressional Quarterly Inc. 1255 22nd Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037 | 202-419-8500
Pelosi ready to move on war funding
By David Rogers
Politico.com
June 10, 2009 07:54 PM EST
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23611.html
With the Senate poised to act Thursday, a landmark tobacco regulation bill could go to the White House as early as next week, when Democrats also hope to complete a long-delayed war funding bill sought by President Barack Obama.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi told POLITICO Wednesday that she will urge the House to approve the Senate version of the tobacco bill without insisting on a formal conference between the chambers. “Yes,” she said flatly, when asked if House Democrats could accept revisions made thus far by the Senate bill managers to win over key Republicans. “As I understand the provisions in the bill, and my information is as recent as last night, yes. … Everything I hear is positive.”
In the case of the war funding bill, Pelosi and the White House have held back for weeks trying to find a path around Republican resistance to new financing for the International Monetary Fund within the now $105 billion measure. But the speaker signaled Wednesday that she is now ready to move, and with her encouragement, House-Senate negotiators will meet Thursday afternoon to ratify a final agreement.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) announced later that he expects the package to be on the floor next week. By design or not, that sequencing allows the House time to deal first with a separate but related Foreign Affairs Committee bill involving the U.S.-Pakistan relationship. Pelosi laughed off any “Byzantine” linkage. But to the extent that the floor debate gives liberals a chance to express themselves, it could also make it easier to win over swing votes on the war funding.
The White House itself seemed content just to see movement. “We’re happy campers,” one official said of the proposed deal before negotiators.
Indeed, Obama will get much of what he wants in terms of his Afghanistan-Pakistan policy, the IMF and emergency health monies to cope with the threat of the H1N1 flu recurring next winter. But no new funds are included for the closing of the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo, and the House is demanding that the Senate drop language that seeks to block — for at least three years — public access to controversial photographs of detainees held at American military facilities.
The administration, in response to a court suit pending in New York, also opposes release of the same photos. But given the global economic crisis, securing the IMF funding has seemed to be the White House’s greater priority. And liberal Democrats want the Senate language out in return for their votes for the bill.
As part of the bargaining, negotiators are expected to accept language that will allow Guantanamo prisoners to be brought into the United States for the purposes of prosecution 45 days after the administration has submitted certifications to Congress. But the administration will have to live with the Senate’s insistence that none of the detainees be transferred more permanently to maximum-security facilities in the United States.
The single-largest piece of the bill is $77.16 billion for the Defense Department, largely to maintain operations in Iraq and support Obama’s increased commitment to Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Included are funds for a greatly expanded U.S. role in training and equipping Pakistani troops, who will be asked to carry out more counterinsurgency operations against Taliban forces operating in their country and along the border with Afghanistan. This aid will move first through Defense and later through the State Department in two installments, totaling as much as $1.1 billion by Oct. 1.
Closer to home, the bill provides $18.7 billion for military personnel, about $2.5 billion above the administration’s request to deal with a cost overrun in, especially, the Army and Army National Guard. Nearly $28.5 billion is provided for procurement, including billions added for the purchase of air transports and armored vehicles.
Eight Boeing C-17s would cost about $2.1 billion, and an additional $504 million would cover seven C-130s, manufactured by Lockheed. General Dynamics has a stake in $200 million for the purchase of Stryker armored vehicles for the Army, and the bill adds $1.9 billion to the Pentagon’s requests for more heavily armored, mine-resistant MRAPs.
Total spending for State Department and foreign aid accounts is $9.5 billion; another $700 million is provided for food assistance overseas. Afghanistan and Pakistan are among the major recipients, including $225 million to help the Islamabad government deal with the refugee crisis triggered by recent fighting.
But to an unusual degree, even routine foreign aid requests for Middle East countries such as Israel, Egypt and Jordan have been added to the mix. This is all part of a Democratic strategy to shift costs from 2010 into 2009 and thereby leave more room under next year’s spending caps.
The new IMF financing represents an added $5 billion cost on top of the foreign aid package. And Obama is expected to come away with about $7.65 billion as a reserve against the threat of pandemic flu.
Going forward, the House still appears to pose the more serious political test for the administration.
If Republicans hold true to their vow to oppose any IMF funding, the president and Pelosi will have to bring over anti-war liberals who opposed the same measure last month.
The leadership has helped itself with auto-state lawmakers of both parties by including initial funding for a “cash-for-clunkers” initiative that pays vouchers of up to $4,500 to consumers who buy more-fuel-efficient new cars and pickup trucks. And privately, Democrats believe that some Republicans will back the bill, since the lion’s share of the money is for Defense and ongoing military operations.
Consider the case of Rep. John McHugh, who was just nominated by Obama to be the secretary of the Army. The popular New York Republican described himself as taking a wait-and-see approach to the final bill. “It’s a tough vote,” he said, laughing.
© 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC
