|
The War Profiteers - War Crimes,
Kidnappings, Torture and Big Money |
|
October 30th,
2007 - Democrats Consider More Money for War |
|
Democrats Consider More
Money for War By Anne Flaherty Associated Press October 30, 2007 Washington - Democrats are
debating whether to approve up to $70 billion more for Iraq and Afghanistan,
only a down payment on President Bush's $196 billion war spending request but
enough to keep the wars afloat for several more months. Such a move would satisfy
party members who want to spare the Pentagon from a painful budget dance and
show support for the troops as Congress considers its next major step on
Iraq. But it also would irritate
scores of other Democrats, who want to pay only to bring troops home and who
say their leadership is not doing enough to end the war. "I cannot vote for
another dollar that will be used to continue the president's occupation of
Iraq," said Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif. The debate comes as the
Government Accountability Office found enemy attacks in Iraq were on the
decline, from about 5,300 in June to 3,000 in September. But GAO also found that U.S.
efforts to rebuild the country lacked clear direction - a weakness
"compounded" by Iraq's lack of planning for oil production. GAO predicted Iraq would
need $20 billion to $30 billion over the next several years to reach and
sustain oil production of 5 million barrels per day. Current production has
consistently fallen below the U.S. goal of 3 million barrels per day, GAO
states. Democratic leaders caution
that no decisions have been made on the war spending, including whether to
approve any money at all. Also uncertain is which spending bill might contain
the war money. Senate Majority Leader Harry
Reid said Tuesday he didn't think Congress should approve the money and won't
deal with it immediately. Delaying the money signals to voters that "the
president does not have a blank check," he told reporters. Meanwhile, Democrats are
locked in a dispute with Bush on domestic spending. None of the dozen annual
spending bills, including the Pentagon's annual $460 billion budget, has been
approved. Democrats say one
possibility is sending Bush a bill that would bundle together the defense and
veterans spending he wants with extra money for education that he doesn't.
The bill would not likely include war funding, officials said. On Tuesday, Bush said he
would veto such a measure, calling it a "three-bill pileup." On the table for war
spending are estimates of $40 billion to $70 billion - with $50 billion
considered the most likely scenario. The final amount would depend on how
many months of combat Democrats would want to support, and how much money
they think the Pentagon needs to buy new bomb-resistant vehicles that protect
troops from roadside blasts. Many Democrats say the money
is necessary if Congress passes an annual defense spending bill without any
war funding. If left without a "bridge fund" to fill the gap until
Congress takes up the full $196 billion request, the Pentagon would have to
divert money from less urgent accounts to pay for immediate war requirements
- an approach military officials warn is disruptive and inefficient. These Democrats also say
they want to avoid giving the public perception that the party is turning its
back on the troops. Earlier this fall, Democrats
decided to delay action on Bush's war spending request until next year.
Unable to pass veto-proof legislation ordering troops home, they also are
divided on whether to continue paying for the unpopular war. Party officials say they
hope that by next year, as election season approaches, more Republicans might
be willing to support anti-war legislation. House and Senate
appropriators hope to complete an agreement on the 2008 defense
appropriations bill on Thursday. Neither the House nor the Senate version of
the bill includes war spending. Meeting privately on Tuesday
to discuss the bill were Reps. John Murtha and C.W. Bill Young and Sens.
Daniel Inouye and Ted Stevens. Murtha, D-Pa., and Inouye, D-Hawaii, chair the
House and Senate panels that oversee military spending; Young, R-Fla., and
Stevens, R-Alaska, are the top Republicans on those subcommittees. Murtha said he supports
adding the war spending to the Pentagon's core budget, but the leadership
opposes it. Copyright © 2007 The
Associated Press. External link: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hcWJu9bbzrJZ7uNHjvMn0BuTGqHQD8SJR8S80 |