David Obey, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, today announced that he will not report the Iraq War Supplemental out of committee, and basically told the President that the ball is in his court, that he needs to submit a supplemental that meets several criteria, or there will be no supplemental funding bill.
Unfortunately, while Kos rightfully deemed the plan "brilliant", the proposal was met with a shrug and a yawn by Kossacks. Then, when Speaker Pelosi expressed opposition to an ancillary component of Obey's plan, which was fully expected by Obey himself, people seemed to act like the whole plan was dead in the water, and many calls for Pelosi's resignation ensued.
In case you missed it, here's an excerpt from Obey's remarks:
The President is asking Congress to appropriate an additional supplemental request of almost 200 billion dollars, a blank check to finance US activities in Iraq, and he clearly expects that request to be repeated for years to come. I would be more than willing to report out a supplemental meeting the President's request if that request were made in support of a change in policy that would do three things:
First-- establish as a goal the end of US involvement in combat operations by January of 2009;
Second-- ensure that troops would have adequate home time between deployments as outlined in the Murtha and Webb Amendments;
Third-- as part of a determination to engage in an intensive broad scale diplomatic offensive, involving other countries in that region.
But this policy does not do that. It simply borrows almost 200 billion dollars to give to the Demartments of Defense, State, Energy, and Justice-- with no change in sight. As Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, I have absolutely no intention of reporting out of committee anytime this session any such request that simply serves to continue the status quo. I also have no intention of acquiescing to a policy which will result in draining the treasury so dry that it will result in the systematic disinvestment in America's future.
...
There's a lot of things around here I can't control, but there's one thing I can control-- and that is reporting out of my committee that supplemental. That's one thing that is in my jurisdiction. And so that's why I wanted to emphasize today that I have no intention of reporting out a 200 billion dollar supplemental that will simply in effect be the equivalent of a blank check for the White House on this war. It isn't just the money; it is the fact that this is a dead-end policy with a dead-end approach and it will leave us tied down there for years.
Appropriations Chairman David Obey
(mcjoan's diary lists the details of the plan and summarizes the day's action. And you can see Obey's remarks in their entirety on C-SPAN.org.)
How many times have you heard some variation of "We don't have the votes"? Well, today, for the first time, a legislator with the power to back up his words has pledged to take an approach that does not require a floor vote in order to push this war toward an end. Chairman Obey has taken ownership of the issue and said that he will not report an Iraq War supplemental bill out of his committee unless it meets his criteria. Contrast this with other "plans" which have really just been bills that have required majority or supermajority votes for success. Votes that, to date, have not materialized or really even come close.
Obey's strategy forces a showdown with the President on war funding. And unlike other proposals, Obey has the power to force the showdown, via his Appropriations Committee Chairmanship.
And as far as this thing about this war surtax that Obey favors? This thing that Pelosi "strangled", this thing that is somehow being characterized as making the Obey plan "dead on arrival"?
Much ado about very little.
The surtax is not central to Rep. Obey's pledge to not report a $200 billion blank-check supplemental this time around. And that Democratic leadership was not enthusiastic about the war surtax was no surprise-- in fact, Obey specifically addressed this exact point this morning, long before Pelosi made her statement:
Obey: I don't expect to see the leadership jump to embrace our position on taxes at this point. As far as whether they're on board with this, you'll have to talk to them.
So later, Speaker Pelosi comes out and says that she's not in favor of the war surtax, as Rep. Obey predicted. Big fucking deal-- and guess what? That war surtax was yet another of those ideas that needs votes in order to pass and a presidential signature or a veto override to become law anyway. Ain't gonna happen, and Obey knows it as well as anybody. So the people who were so concerned about Pelosi coming out against the war surtax need to take a deep breath and relax. It's just not all that significant.
But that doesn't mean that I'm unhappy at all that Obey included the war surtax in his discussion today. File it under the same tab as Charlie Rangel's proposal for a draft-- it's not going to pass, but it gets important discussions going.
Now if Pelosi says that Obey better play ball on this supplemental or she's going to replace him as Appropriations Committee Chairman, then you can tell me "I told you so". But that's not going to happen either. When leadership chooses Committee chairs, they are delegating their authority. Our Democratic leaders are sometimes reluctant to take the strong stands we would like, but they would be ten times as reluctant to replace a powerful committee chair like Obey. So Rep. Obey is essentially the most powerful person in Congress when it comes to any Iraq War funding supplemental bill, not Speaker Pelosi.
Bottom line:
- This was a very good day if you want this war to end;
- Nancy Pelosi did NOT shoot down Obey's plan;
- It wouldn't hurt to see a little support for Obey around here.
Does this plan end the war as quickly as many of us would like? No-- Rep. Murtha estimates that President Bush would be able to fund the war out of the regular Defense budget until February or even March. Were Obey's criteria the toughest possible set of conditions that could possibly be placed on the supplemental? No-- Obey proposed attaching a goal of ending combat operations in Iraq by January 2009-- an earlier target date and a timeline would have been tougher. Nonetheless, I think that given Rep. Obey's unique and powerful position, this approach has a greater chance of success than other plans which are out there, many of which are retreads of plans that have already failed. So I endorse Obey's statements today wholeheartedly, and I urge my fellow Kossacks to support Obey as well.
Click here to contact Rep. Obey with your support!