Advertising

The Seattle Times Company

NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds | seattletimes.com

Politics & Government


Our network sites seattletimes.com | Advanced

Originally published June 17, 2009 at 12:00 AM | Page modified June 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM

Comments (0)     E-mail E-mail article      Print Print      Share Share

House OKs $106B war-funding bill

A divided House of Representatives Tuesday approved 226-202 a $105.9 billion emergency-spending bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and help curb flu outbreaks.

McClatchy Newspapers

Not just military spending

In addition to funding military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the war-funding bill passed by the House Tuesday included:

Foreign aid: $10.4 billion ($3 billion more than requested) for international aid, including $1.4 billion for Afghanistan and $2.4 billion for Pakistan. It provides $420 million ($354 million more than requested) to fight violence along the Mexican border.

Flu response: $7.7 billion for responding to the pandemic flu, including $5.8 billion in contingency-emergency funds ($2.2 billion more than requested).

IMF: $5 billion to secure a $108 billion U.S. line of credit to the International Monetary Fund

Guantánamo: No money for closing the detention facility at Guantánamo. Prohibits current detainees from being transferred to the United States except to be prosecuted and only after Congress receives a plan detailing risks involved.

Cash for clunkers: $1 billion for the "cash-for-clunkers" voucher program for people who turn in old vehicles for more fuel-efficient models (not in original request).

Transit funds: Regional-transit systems will be allowed to use up to 10 percent of their stimulus funds for operating aid. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., pushed for the provision allowing for stimulus money to be used for operating purposes.

Etc.: $250 million for fighting wildfires; $847 million for Army Corps projects in hurricane-damaged Gulf Coast areas; $71.6 million for a modern digital-radio system for District of Columbia Capitol Police; $10 million for improved law enforcement at the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Seattle Times news services

advertising

WASHINGTON — A divided House of Representatives Tuesday approved 226-202 a $105.9 billion emergency-spending bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and help curb flu outbreaks.

But many lawmakers in both parties were uneasy.

Many Democrats wanted President Obama to provide a clearer strategy for Afghanistan. Republicans protested aid to the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Members of both parties were skittish about the lack of an explicit ban on releasing terrorist-detainee photos.

Democratic leaders — with some heavy lobbying from the White House — won, though, reminding colleagues about the inclusion of some sweeteners such as a "cash-for-clunkers" auto-sales program, funds to help provide air service in rural areas and housing aid for victims of 2005's Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

Personal attention

White House aides worked the halls during the hours before the vote, and chief of staff Rahm Emanuel called some lawmakers personally. Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., who was undecided and wound up voting yes, said he talked to Emanuel by phone for about five minutes as Obama's top aide explained the administration's strategy in the war on terror.

Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., who voted no, said he'd heard from "everybody but" the president himself.

The lobbying worked — and the bill now goes to a similarly split Senate. It would provide $79.9 billion in military funding for the wars, $10.4 billion in diplomatic and humanitarian aid to Afghanistan and other countries in the region, and $7.7 billion to help control the flu pandemic. The measure is to provide funds through Sept. 30, the end of the current fiscal year.

Those provisions weren't the flash points, though.

Instead, Democratic leaders found they had to pressure colleagues who are wary of an Afghanistan war that appears to them to have no end and no exit strategy. Fifty-one Democrats voted against a similar funding bill last month, and despite a frantic lobbying effort by Democratic leaders, most wouldn't budge.

"I don't vote to fund the troops in these situations, ever," said Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif., a co-chairwoman of the House Progressive Caucus.

"How do we support the troops? We support them by bringing them home. That's what we should be appropriating money for, not to keep them there," added Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio.

Some Democrats were assuaged by the bill's guarantee that Obama must provide reports early next year detailing the U.S. policy objectives and whether Afghanistan and Pakistan are helping to implement that policy. Others saw enough other provisions in the bill that they could go along.

The view of Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Ohio, was typical. She was concerned about the lack of an Afghanistan exit strategy, saying, "Our brave soldiers need to know we have a plan and we're looking out for them."

However, she liked the $1 billion for the "cash-for-clunkers" program — which would pay people for trading in old gas-guzzling cars for new more-efficient vehicles — as well as other items, and voted yes.

Different point of view

Republicans had different objections, notably that what should have been a war-funding bill had become loaded with other nonemergency items.

"This bill has crumbled from what it was intended to be," said Rep. David Dreier, R-Calif.

When the measure first came up last month, 168 GOP House members and 200 Democrats voted for it. This time, only five Republicans voted for the bill, along with 221 Democrats.

Since then, lawmakers added $5 billion for the IMF, fulfilling a pledge Obama made in April at the G-20 meeting of foreign leaders, and that ignited a Republican firestorm.

"Those funds will eventually make their way to countries unfriendly to the United States," said Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif.

Many Republicans, and some Democrats, also remained concerned that the bill didn't bar the release of photos of abused detainees at U.S.-run prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Obama tried to defuse that controversy with a letter last week, as well as some personal campaigning, assuring members of Congress that he wouldn't release the pictures.

The photo issue is expected to become a major debating point in the Senate, where Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has threatened to bring the Senate to a halt unless Obama agrees to issue an executive order banning their release or lawmakers pass separate legislation imposing a ban.

Washington's House delegation split along party lines, with Democrats in favor of the measure and Republicans voting no. The House vote was preceded by strong lobbying from Democratic leaders

Copyright © 2009 The Seattle Times Company

More Politics headlines...

E-mail E-mail article      Print Print      Share Share

Comments
No comments have been posted to this article.


Get home delivery today!

More Politics

Others states' fights bring focus to Daniels

NEW - 07:13 AM
South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley is writing memoir

Bill would make jail mug shots available

Immigration, license bill voted down in state Senate

Rival Texas bills require sonograms before abortions

Advertising

Video

Marketplace

Advertising