03/22/2007

By MATTHEW DALY  / Associated Press

With a vote on the House floor expected by week's end, several Northwest lawmakers remain undecided about legislation requiring President Bush to bring combat troops home from Iraq next year.

The measure, attached to a $124 billion spending bill, faces opposition from liberal Democrats concerned that it does not end the war quickly enough, and from Republicans who say the United States should not put a timetable on troop withdrawal.

In the end, most Democrats in the Washington and Oregon delegations are expected to support the bill — which also includes crucial funding for rural counties hurt by logging cutbacks and other domestic spending — while Republicans are likely to oppose it.

Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., said he will support the bill, which is widely considered an early test of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and the new Democratic majority in the House.

"I think it's extraordinarily meaningful that within three months of taking over (Congress) we are challenging the president's commitment to an open-ended, stay-the-course, war without end" in Iraq, DeFazio said. "We're saying no, (the end of the war) is going to happen on your watch."

DeFazio, a member of the Out of Iraq Caucus, said he would support stronger language that pushes for an immediate end to the war, but recognizes that it would be impossible to pass such language in a closely divided Congress. As written, the House bill — which President Bush has threatened to veto — would require that combat troops be out of Iraq before September 2008, or sooner if the Iraqi government does not meet certain benchmarks.

"Would I like it to be stronger? Yes," DeFazio said. "Can we get votes for that? Absolutely not. It's not clear we can get votes for this."

Indeed, several Northwest lawmakers are undecided. That list ranges from liberal Democrats such as Reps. Earl Blumenauer of Portland and Jim McDermott of Seattle, to conservative Republican Rep. Greg Walden of Hood River, Ore., and moderate Republican Rep. Dave Reichert from the suburbs east of Seattle.

Blumenauer declined to comment Wednesday, but a spokeswoman said he was talking to Pelosi and other Democratic leaders "to make sure we get the best bill we possibly can, and he will make his final decision when he's ready."

The spokeswoman, Erin Allweiss, said Blumenauer is "excited about what's in (the bill) for Oregon," but wants to make sure the language on Iraq is acceptable.

McDermott, normally a close ally of Pelosi, is also undecided. In a statement e-mailed to The Associated Press, McDermott called the vote both personal and deeply felt.

"My experience is such that I don't want to do anything to extend this war," he wrote. "While I respect and admire the leadership of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, this is a vote of conscience. For me, this is a decision to send people, perhaps, to their death. This is one of the most important votes I will ever cast in the House. I want to be firm in my convictions before casting my ballot."

Walden said he was leaning no, but was still undecided late Wednesday.

"The bottom line is this bill cannot become law without the signature of the president, who today says he will veto it on account of the (domestic) spending and the language that restricts his authority to command the troops" in Iraq, Walden said.

Walden, who worked with DeFazio and others to include $400 million for rural counties in Oregon and other states hard-hit by logging cutbacks, said he hated to vote against the timber money, but may not have a choice.

He said Pelosi and other Democratic leaders should "get together with the White House and figure out something that can pass and become law and includes emergency relief for the timber counties."

Reichert, of suburban Auburn, Wash., did not respond to repeated phone calls and e-mails.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee was less shy, challenging Reichert in a statement to vote for the bill, which the Democrats said would provide urgently needed support for veterans and address problems at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and other Army hospitals.

"Will Rep. Dave Reichert turn his back on our troops and our veterans, and be just another 'Rubberstamp Republican' for President Bush's misguided Iraq policy?" asked Jennifer Crider, communications director for the DCCC. "Our troops and the 63,571 veterans in Rep. Reichert's district deserve someone who will fight for them as hard as our troops are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan."

Other Northwest lawmakers have made up their minds.

Democratic Reps. Adam Smith, Norm Dicks, Rick Larsen, Jay Inslee and Brian Baird of Washington state, and Darlene Hooley and David Wu of Oregon all support the bill.

Smith, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, has long backed a strategic redeployment of U.S. troops in Iraq. He said he believes the president's insistence on "no-strings-attached-funding for an open-ended, no-end-in-sight failed Iraq policy is inappropriate."

Republican Reps. Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Doc Hastings of Washington state, and Bill Sali and Mike Simpson of Idaho, oppose the bill. Sali, a freshman, said it was wrong for Democrats to use "political bribery" such as the $400 million timber payments to secure votes for the bill.

"If Democratic leadership in the House truly believes as I do that we need to provide relief for our rural schools, they should be willing to vote with me in favor of it in a straight up-or-down vote," Sali said in a statement. "But military determinations on how to protect our troops as we bring about a secure, self-governing Iraq should be considered separately and with the singular attention that the matter deserves."