President George Bush has been sent a pointed message by the GOP-dominated Senate: give us detailed progress reports on Iraq, which include goals and progress so far.
In reality, the message sent by the GOPers, in a bipartisan vote, amounted to the GOP leadership “stealing the thunder” of the Democrats who had been pressing for just this — except they also unsuccessfully sought a timetable for withdrawal. Some details from the New York Times:
The Senate signaled its growing unease with the war in Iraq today, voting overwhelmingly to demand regular reports from the White House on the course of the conflict and on the progress that Iraqi forces are making in securing their own country.
The vote, 79 to 19, came on an amendment to a spending bill that ultimately passed without opposition. The bipartisan support for the amendment sponsored by Senator John W. Warner, the Virginia Republican who heads the Armed Services Committee, reflected anxiety among Republicans as well as Democrats.
TRANSLATION: There is indeed The Power Of One….but even more powerful is The Power Of Polls. MORE:
Mr. Warner said afterward that he was “very grateful” for the wide backing of his amendment, which he called “forward looking” and distinctly different from a Democratic alternative that many Republicans said would signal that the United States was ready to “cut and run” from the battlefield.
The message that Iraqis should take from the Senate action, Mr. Warner said, is that “we have stood with you, we have done our part,” and now it is time for them to do theirs. He said 2006 would be a pivotal year for the campaign in Iraq.
Minutes before endorsing Mr. Warner’s amendment, the Senate voted, 58 to 40, against a measure offered by Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, to demand that President Bush set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.
“We need to have 2006 be a year of transition,” Mr. Levin said as he declared that with his own amendment defeated, he would back the one offered by his Republican colleague. “I support the Warner amendment as the second-best approach,” he said.
Of course, this measure may be more of a statement than anything that emerges intact. Will the more conservative House of Representatives go along with it, too? Stay tuned…
Does this sound clear-cut? Seemingly yes, until you read what (surprise) Majority Leader Bill Frist has to say via the Washington Post:
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) took to the Senate floor to insist that his colleagues were in no way trying to shift administration policy or rebuke the White House, calling such an assessment “absurd” and “ridiculous.”
“It’s not a change in policy,” he said. “It’s a continuation of the oversight we’ve been conducting for years in United States Senate.”
Really? Readers are welcome to do their own Google search and see if
today’s vote resembles Congress’ attitude towards the Iraq War so far. Frist is quickly becoming the one politician who needs a fact check even when he belches. MORE:
But rank-and-file Republicans — even some of Bush’s most loyal supporters — conceded the political atmosphere has changed. Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio), who faces a tough re-election bid in a state with marked misgivings about the war, said the Senate is finally becoming more involved in war policy, and the trend will grow only more pronounced.
“This is the way it should be; we should be involved,” DeWine said. “It’s a natural result of where the war is at this point, that it goes on.”
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), a staunch Bush ally, insisted the Senate vote did not indicate a change in war strategy, while also saying that Congress was becoming more assertive.
“Congress can clearly play a more robust role, and that’s what you’re seeing,” he said. “It’s a change in that Congress is stepping in to fill the void.”
TRANSLATION: Cut away all the diplomatic language and it’s clear that despite their differences members of Congress of both parties are not going to sit back and give the President a free pass anymore. He’s going to have to start answering to them on some matters that he should have been answering for to Congress to all along. The reason: polls show Bush is weak, Democrats see an opening, and Republicans don’t want to cement their careers to George W. Bush anymore.
A USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll taken Friday through Sunday found that just more than half of those surveyed wanted to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within the next 12 months. In a Gallup Poll in July-August 1970, just less than half wanted to withdraw U.S. troops from Vietnam within 12 months.
In both surveys, about one-third supported withdrawing troops over as many years as needed, and about one in 10 wanted to send more troops.
Growing unease over the war in Iraq was reflected on Capitol Hill, at the Pentagon and in foreign capitals in recent days. In the Senate Tuesday, Republicans defeated a Democratic proposal that called on Bush to outline a timetable for the phased withdrawal of U.S. troops. Senate Republican leaders countered with their own non-binding resolution that urged next year “should be a period of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty.”
“There’s a growing desire to get out of Iraq, almost regardless of the consequences,” says George Herring, a history professor emeritus at the University of Kentucky and author of America’s Longest War: The United States and Vietnam, 1950-1975. “This is the way things began to develop in Vietnam after the fall of 1967.”
In 1970, 56% said the decision to send troops to Vietnam was a mistake. That number reached a high of 61% before the war ended in 1973. Now, 54% say the decision to send troops to Iraq was a mistake.
So you could look at this vote several ways:
(1) The GOPers are genuinely trying to steal the Democrats’ thunder on this issue, to put a political protective coat around the party and gingerly begin a separation from George Bush if there is no apparent “light at the end of the tunnel.”
(2) The GOPers are strictly doing it for political cover.
(3) It’s the opening salvo in a new barrage of troubles over Iraq for the Bush administration that could leave it and its elite neocon policymakers more isolated than ever.
Indeed, a somewhat shocking report in the Washington Times paints a picture of a President Bush almost totally isolated — from most high officials and advisors and barely on speaking terms with his own father. The best summary of it (with a link to the original) is HERE on Americablog (a liberal weblog).
If this is true, it would indicate Bush is following the tragic path of Lyndon Johnson, who due to the unpopularity of the Vietnam War ended office increasingly isolated and relegated to making speeches on more controllable military bases. If this report is not true, the question becomes: who is leaking this info and why? Even worse: several tabloids over the past few months (the latest, this week’s Globe) have carried blind-source stories alleging Bush has drinking problems.
If you add all of these factors (polls going down, an assertive Congress, reports in the mainstream and tabloid press about GWB being impacted by the pressures) it still doesn’t seem as if an offensive about Democrats undermining the war effort will be enough to turn things around. Bush is on the political descent; reversals aren’t unusual in American politics but this will seemingly take more than a few speeches to reverse. And much will depend on the news from Iraq.
SOME MORE STORIES ON THIS ISSUE:
U.S. Senate seeks speedier handover in Iraq
Senate demands accountability on war
Senate rejects timetable for Iraq withdrawal
Senate Calls for Faster Move to Iraqi Sovereignty
Animated telegraph via WM8C.