WAR STORIES

The idea of spending another $100 billion on Bush's Iraq War is pretty unacceptable. If Nancy Pelosi had the power to end the war she would do it. She doesn't. There are too many Republicans and reactionary Democrats that have been elected in the House and in the Senate. It's that simple. So what she did instead was put together a compromise that requires Bush to accept funding his other neglected catastrophes-- from Katrina rebuilding to veterans' healthcare-- plus requires him to live up to Department of Defense metrics for military preparedness and... most galling of all from his persepctive, to start wrapping up this catastrophic war next year.

The battle now shifts to the Senate and then will be fought out in the court of public opinion.

Many progressives were anguished and confused about the Supplemental Spending Bill. No one favored giving Bush another year to wreak havoc with another $100 billion dollars. But no one came up with a more pragmatic alternative to end the war. So, in the end, progressives got on board, almost to the last man. The only Democrats to have voted against Bush on every single one of the 44 Iraq-releated roll calls between October 10, 2002 and May 25, 2005 were Raul Grijalva (AZ), Maurice Hinchey (NY), James McGovern (MA) and Donald Payne (NJ). They all voted with Speaker Pelosi. As I mentioned the other day, at the end  the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Out of Iraq Caucus reluctantly got on board as well.

Barbara Lee (CA), Lynn Woolsey (CA), John Lewis (GA) and Maxine Waters (CA) cast symbolic "no" votes on behalf of all the anti-war Democrats who were feeling teh anguish big-time over this approach. And how did Speaker Pelosi feel about this "rebellion?" She praised them and led the House Democratic Caucus in giving them a standing ovation for their courageous and principled stand following an agreement Thursday night to stop whipping opposition to the measure, clearing the way for about 10 other liberals to support the bill, assuring passage. CongressDaily reported on some of the behind the scenes action.

Thursday's deal came as Republicans circulated a list of 29 Democrats who were expected to oppose the bill. In the end, only 14 Democrats defected as the measure passed, 218-212. Pelosi picked up momentum Thursday, when Reps. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., Albert Wynn, D-Md., Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y., and James McGovern, D-Mass., who had been undecided, announced they would support the measure. Their votes were freed up as part of the 11th-hour deal worked out by the leaders and the anti-war caucus. Although some in the anti-war caucus stressed there was no quid pro quo to get Waters, Lee and Woolsey to stand down, other Democratic aides said the final agreement resulted from intense arm twisting and promises by the leaders as the hours wound down before the vote. One key might have come last week, after leaders pulled strong language about Iran from the bill to appease conservative Blue Dog Democrats. As liberal members threatened a revolt of their own, Pelosi promised in one Caucus meeting that they would get a chance to vote on a stand-alone measure to require President Bush to get congressional approval before taking military action against Iran.

Earlier in the week, with the outcome still uncertain, Pelosi and other leaders enlisted Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean and AFL-CIO Chairman John Sweeney to call lawmakers. Such efforts created some animosity, but judging from the clapping and cheering heard behind the Caucus' closed doors this morning, it was short-lived. But not everyone was happy. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, noted that four years ago lawmakers were told there was no alternative to invading Iraq, and now they are being told the only alternative is to continue the war. "That kind of thinking traps you, the idea that this has to go on," he said. "We are trapped in false logic." For her part, content with a crucial win that until recently had seemed out of reach, Pelosi said the 14 Democrats who voted against the bill would not face repercussions. "I don't even know who they are," she said.

Yesterday David Sirota celebrated by pointing out that the Progressive Caucus in Congress' new power. "The Progressive Democratic Members of Congress who had been considering trying to kill the supplemental bill that includes binding language to end the war made a deal with Speaker Pelosi to provide the necessary votes to pass the legislation. This is a principled and shrewd move that these lawmakers should be applauded for if and when the bill passes. And it is a courageous move because it is never, ever easy to swallow a compromise, even if it is clearly the right thing to do to achieve long-term goals. These Members of Congress played hardball from the beginning, and that hardball made sure this bill included strong, binding legislation to end the war. Without that hardball, that legislation wouldn't be in this supplemental at all. In fact, such binding language probably wouldn't even be voted on at all in any form, much less have a solid chance to be passed by the full House today. And because of their efforts, progressive Democrats have not only brought the war closer to an end, but they have become one of the most powerful blocs in the U.S. Congress."