Looks like there's going to be trouble ahead for Reid getting support for his defunding resolution. It looks like there are some Democrats who aren't prepared to throw the military under the bus for power the way Reid is prepared to do:
He sounds pretty emphatic about it:Stephanopoulos: And Senator Levin, let me begin with you. The Democrats do seem divided on how to respond to the president's challenge. You've had your leader, Senator Harry Reid, sponsor legislation that would cut off all funding for all combat troops next March. Other senators like Barack Obama say after the veto that most of the Senate will vote for the funding, and he thinks they should. Which camp are you in?
Levin: Well, we're not going to vote to cut funding, period. Even Harry Reid acknowledged that that's not going to happen. He has a personal position, which he said was not the caucus position. He was very clear when he joined a bill which would cut off funding under certain circumstances.
We're not going to cut off funding for the troops. We shouldn't cut off funding for the troops…”
- - -
Stephanopoulos: Senator Levin, you've been very clear today. You said that Democrats are not going to cut off funding. Are you sure you can get all of your caucus behind this or enough of your caucus behind this idea? A lot of liberals in the caucus say, "No, we must draw the line here and now."
Levin: No, what we're going to try to do, a majority, I believe, of Democrats and most of the Republicans, is to vote for a bill that funds the troops, period. We're going to fund the troops. We always have.
The Senate will not stop paying for the Iraq war or relent from insisting that President Bush keep pressing the Baghdad government for a negotiated end to the violence, a top Democrat said Sunday.I wonder if Bush has any regrets in not backing Toomey.Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, took issue with an effort by Majority Leader Harry Reid to limit war spending after March 2008 as a way to end U.S. involvement.
"We're not going to vote to cut funding, period," Levin said. "But what we should do, and we're going to do, is continue to press this president to put some pressure on the Iraqi leaders to reach a political settlement."
[...]
"We're going to fund the troops. We always have," Levin said. He added, "We're very strong in supporting the troops, but we're also strong on putting pressure on the Iraqi leaders to live up to their own commitments without that political settlement on their part, there is no military solution."
Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, said "there have not been sufficient efforts at discussions" between lawmakers and White House. "We cannot leave the troops unfunded in the field. That just can't be done. And Congress is not in a position to micromanage the war. But we do not have any good alternative. Right now, you can't see the end of the tunnel, let alone a light at the end of the tunnel."
Specter said he was not prepared "to withdraw funding at this time. But my patience, like many others, is growing very thin."
Reid, D-Nevada, said last week that if Bush rejects the Democrats' legislation, he would join with Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin, one of the party's most liberal members who has long called to end the war by denying funding for it. Reid's latest proposal would give the president one year to get troops out, ending funding for combat operations after March 31, 2008.
