Democrats lard bill to bring troops home from Iraq with domestic projects

By ANDREW TAYLOR
Associated Press
2007-03-10 08:20 AM

Democrats seeking votes for their Iraq-withdrawal plan have stuffed the bill it is in with billions of dollars for farms, flu preparedness, New Orleans levees, home heating and other causes.

Some critics say the Democrats are being opportunistic, using a must-pass measure to authorize money for U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to carry items that could not advance as easily on their own.

At the same time, Democratic leaders are trying to increase support for setting deadlines for ending U.S. military combat in Iraq, which they have made part of the larger legislation.

It is clear that Democrats are unwilling to approve the bill's $100 billion (euro76 billion) for Iraq and Afghanistan without devoting considerable sums to the home front.

"The president wants to make sure we take care of Iraq, but I think we also have to make sure that we don't lose sight of what we have to do here at home," said Democratic Rep. Rahm Emanuel.

Already, money in the bill not directly related to the war exceeds $20 billion (euro15.2 billion).

The funding _ ranging from $3.5 billion (euro2.66 billion) for medical care for veterans and active duty troops to $500 million (euro380.1 million) in "emergency" money for a Western fire season that has yet to start _ has raised hackles with Republicans who say Democrats are using the measure to muscle federal dollars back home.

"Wartime funding should be not used as a gravy train," said conservative Sen. Republican Judd Gregg.

Gregg said the White House would be hard-pressed to veto the bill because of the add-ons. Still, a veto promise hangs over the bill because of its higher-profile provisions that set a deadline for ending the U.S. military role in Iraq.

Meanwhile, the Democratic chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Rep. David Obey, is not waiting on the coming farm bill to extend income subsidies aimed at small dairy farms. Obey's 13-month extension would cost $283 million (euro215.1 million).

Those items and others, including $2.5 billion (euro1.9 billion) for homeland security projects such as additional cargo screening at ports and airports, $2.9 billion (euro2.2 billion) for levee improvements and other aid for the Gulf Coast, and $735 million (euro558.7 million) to close shortfalls in the State Children's Health Insurance Program, offer virtually every lawmaker a reason to vote for the Iraq funding bill regardless of feelings about the war itself.

Later Friday, the White House sent Congress $3.2 billion (euro2.4 billion) in revisions to its $94.3 billion (euro71.7 billion) request for Pentagon operations in Iraq and Afghanistan through Sept. 30.

The money would pay for 4,700 additional troops to support President George W. Bush's influx of 21,500 combat troops to stabilize Baghdad and Anbar province, along with additional funds for vehicles with V-shaped bottoms more resistant to roadside bombs. Another $510 million (euro387.7 million) would send an additional 7,200 troops to Afghanistan to prepare for an offensive expected soon by the Taliban and to train Afghan security forces.

To keep costs down, the White House eliminated several much-criticized requests for airplanes, including two next-generation Joint Strike Fighters, that never would have seen action in Iraq. Opponents said the Pentagon was using the war-funding bill to evade budget limits, much like the criticism being leveled at Democrats for adding domestic items.