Bush, Democrats Search for Iraq Compromise After Veto (Update2)

By Nicholas Johnston and Edwin Chen

May 2 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush's veto of a war-funding measure that called for U.S. combat forces to leave Iraq next year set the stage for a compromise with Democrats that both sides say may be within reach.

Bush and congressional leaders plan to meet at the White House today to start working their way out of the showdown over supplying the military with the money it needs for the rest of the year and Democratic demands that the U.S. change course.

Bush said Democrats are trying to force a ``precipitous withdrawal'' from Iraq. ``I am confident that with good will on both sides that we can move beyond political statements and agree on a bill that will give our troops the funds and flexibility to do the job we've asked them to do,'' Bush said in a Washington speech to the Associated General Contractors of America.

While Democrats don't have enough votes to override the president's veto of a withdrawal timetable, there is growing support among congressional Republicans for requiring the Iraqi government to meet benchmarks for reducing sectarian violence and reaching a political reconciliation among ethnic groups.

``There are a number of Republicans who do think that some kind of benchmarks, properly crafted, would actually be helpful,'' said Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, his party's leader in the chamber.

Benchmarks and Penalties

A likely sticking point is whether to include penalties if the Iraqi government fails to meet the benchmarks. Democrats, and some Republicans such as Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine, insist that there be consequences for falling short, such as a loss of U.S. financial support or the withdrawal of some coalition forces.

``We can't be there in an open-ended fashion,'' Snowe said. ``We have to say: how long does it really take to pass the benchmarks?''

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said the Iraqis already have benchmarks to meet. The administration won't accept ``anything that jeopardizes the government of Iraq or weakens the ability of our forces to succeed,'' Snow said.

The legislation Bush vetoed yesterday included benchmarks for strengthening the Iraqi security forces and disarming local militias; pursuing reconciliation among Iraq's ethnic groups, reducing the overall level of sectarian violence in Iraq and ensuring the rights of minority parties in the parliament.

Definition of Success

Bush said today that his definition of success in Iraq isn't an absence of violence. ``There are certain parts of our own country that have got a certain level of violence,'' he said. ``But success is a level of violence where the people feel comfortable about living their daily lives, and that's what we're trying to achieve.''

The fourth of five brigades Bush ordered added to the U.S. force in Iraq in January is now there, bringing the level of troops to 146,000, Pentagon spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Mark Ballesteros told reporters.

The vetoed legislation would have required the pullout of some troops by as early as July 1 and the loss of funds if the benchmarks weren't met. The legislation also mandated an administration report to Congress every 60 days on Iraqi progress in meeting the benchmarks.

`Great Distance'

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, said the bill ``honored and respected the wishes of the American people.'' Congress, she said, won't give Bush a ``blank check'' to conduct the war and there was still ``a great distance between us right now.''

Bush spokesman Snow said he'd be ``very surprised'' if there was an agreement coming from today's meeting.

The events surrounding the passage of the legislation and the veto were marked by partisan maneuvers.

Democrats, who completed work last week on the $124.2 billion funding measure, held a ceremony to send the bill to the White House yesterday, the fourth anniversary of Bush's declaration that major combat operations in Iraq were over.

Since then, Iraq has been beset by four years of escalating violence by sectarian militias, insurgents and terrorists and 2,616 U.S. military personnel have been killed in combat.

Rather than beginning a drawdown of U.S. forces this year, as Bush has said he expected to do, the president ordered almost 30,000 more troops to Iraq to help quell violence in Baghdad.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said Bush ``has put our troops in the middle of a civil war'' and that ``a change of course is needed.''

`Systemic Assault'

Bush said the attacks in Iraq are ``a systemic assault on the entire nation,'' and linked stopping al-Qaeda terrorists there to protecting Americans at home. ``If I didn't think it was necessary for the security of the country, I wouldn't put our kids in harm's way,'' he said. ``Even if you think it was a mistake to go into Iraq, it would be a far greater mistake to pull out now.''

Bush and lawmakers are under pressure to agree on Iraq funding before the Defense Department runs short of money to pay for a war that costs the government $8.6 billion a month.

The Congressional Research Service said the Army can sustain its operations ``through most of July'' without new funding, while Bush administration officials have said the military might be hampered by a funding crunch as early as May 15. Bush yesterday called the need for funding ``urgent.''

The president also called on Congress to strip away about $20 billion that lawmakers included in the legislation for domestic programs unrelated to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Representative John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat, said he is considering a funding measure to pay for military operations through the summer and allow lawmakers to return to the issue. He said the military can fund operations through June and any compromise would be worked out well before then.

Murtha said any final spending measure needs consequences to pressure the Iraqi government to make the political choices needed to bring peace to the country. ``These guys are not moving, there's no incentive for them,'' he said. ``That's why I'm so adamant there ought to be timelines and benchmarks.''

To contact the reporters on this story: Edwin Chen in Washington at echen32@bloomberg.net Nicholas Johnston in Washington at njohnston3@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: May 2, 2007 12:03 EDT

		Email this article Printer friendly format