And will probably (you never know with these guys) get the spending bill to the president by Friday so that he can veto it. They are trying to figure out what to do next:
Democrats are considering their next step after President Bush's inevitable veto of their war spending proposal, including a possible short-term funding bill that would force Congress to revisit the issue this summer.
Another alternative is providing the Pentagon the money it needs for the war but insisting that the Iraqi government live up to certain political promises. Or, the congressional Democrats could send Bush what he wants for now and set their sights on 2008 spending legislation.
The options are being weighed as Bush and Congress head toward a showdown this week on his Iraq policy. House and Senate appropriations committees meet Monday to negotiate a final bill that, if approved by both chambers, could reach the president's desk as early as the end of the week.
[...]
Democratic leaders have been reluctant to discuss their next step, focusing instead on their ability to send Bush legislation rebuking his Iraq policy. But other lawmakers say there is no denying that Democrats do not have the two-thirds majority needed to override Bush's veto. And soon enough, everyone will be asking what happens next.
Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., who chairs the House panel that oversees military funding, said he wants a bill that would fund the war for just two or three months. Before that second bill would expire in summer, Democrats would try again to pass legislation calling for an end to combat.
[...]
Murtha's proposal would give Democrats time to try to rally support among Republicans growing increasingly frustrated with the war who have so far been reluctant to tie the hands of their GOP president.
[...]
Levin, D-Mich., said that should Bush veto the war spending bill, Democrats could pass legislation that would drop the timetable for U.S. troop withdrawal but require the Iraqis meet certain benchmarks. He declined to provide further specifics.
[...]
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino dismissed Murtha's suggestion of a short-term funding bill and said Democrats should focus instead on providing troops what they need.
"Since there's only five months left in this supplemental, having this same debate in another month, given their track record on producing legislation, doesn't seem prudent," Perino said.
[...]
"We don't want to throw in the towel," said Moran, D-Va. "The problem is (Bush) is willing to play chicken with funding the troops and we aren't. We just aren't going to take a chance (the Pentagon) will run out of funding for the troops."
Bull cookies!! You are already doing it and everyone knows it. The Democrats have already delayed funding so that they could put pressure on Bush to cave, they think he is softer than he is.
And Perino is right, it's not a good idea for them to revisit this next month given how long it takes them to do anything. It isn't going to do them any good anyway because that's not enough time to see if the plan will work. The Republicans aren't going to cave in a month. The base isn't going to stop supporting the war in a month. It would be smarter for them to wait until the 2008 budget, that way if the plan isn't working they have a stronger case. I think that what they fear is that the plan will work because they own defeat. It's there's. If this works and we turn the problem around in Iraq, they will look like idiots (well, even more so than now) who can't be trusted with our defense (I know, but even more people will think that).
(via)
