Democrats drop press on war policy

WASHINGTON -- Senate Democrats halted their quest to change President Bush's war strategy yesterday after Republicans blocked a proposal to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq.

After the vote, which followed a rare all-night debate, majority leader Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, startled colleagues by announcing that the Senate would not vote on several other proposals intended to force Bush to revisit his war plans.

Although war critics in both parties had supported the measures, Reid and other Democratic leaders dismissed them as weak. Instead, they are holding firm in their bid to persuade GOP critics of Bush's Iraq policy to embrace more aggressive Democratic measures to begin withdrawing troops.

Reid's move was hailed by antiwar groups, which have urged Democrats not to compromise. But the majority leader's decision may also effectively provide Bush with an opportunity that he has wanted: another 60 days to make his case that the war is making progress.

Yesterday's 52-to-47 vote signaled that a slim Senate majority supports bringing home most combat forces by May 1, 2008, and was taken amid indications in recent weeks that a growing number of Republicans are concerned about progress in Iraq. Although Democrats won four Republican defectors, they fell eight votes short of the 60 needed to overcome the GOP's procedural objections.

After the results were tallied, Reid asked GOP leaders to accept simple-majority votes. When they refused, Reid announced that the debate would be suspended, possibly until after Labor Day or until Republicans dropped their filibuster. He called the 60-vote requirement "a new math that was developed by the Republicans to protect the president."

After the vote, Senator John F. Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, released a statement criticizing those who voted against the legislation.

"Today a few Republican senators chose to stand with their president over voting for a policy for our troops that honors their service and sacrifice," Kerry said. "How much longer will some in this Congress fail to vote their conscience and do what's right to bring about change in Iraq? No number of Republican filibusters and politically motivated votes change this fact: Without real deadlines to force Iraqis to compromise, they will not compromise. No American soldier should die for Iraqi unwillingness to solve their differences."

The vote followed 24 straight hours of Iraq speeches on the Senate floor, stretching from 11 a.m. Tuesday until yesterday's vote. Cots that had been wheeled in for the overnight session were wheeled back out to a congressional storage facility, after being used by just six senators.

Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, called the all-night debate "serious and important," while reminding Reid that the 60-vote requirement had become a standard hurdle for controversial measures in a narrowly divided Senate, including when Democrats were the minority party in recent years.

The war proposals are amendments to the annual defense authorization bill, which includes a military pay raise and Iraq equipment upgrades. Reid's decision halted progress on that legislation, promoting criticism from Republicans.

"We are abandoning the men and women in the military if we don't take this bill back up and pass it, conference with the House, and have it signed by the president of the United States, as we have for the past 45 years," said Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona.

But Reid's decision pleased antiwar groups, who have pressed Democrats to bring the war to a close. "I think Senator Reid took an important step toward confronting Republican obstructionism and ending the war," said Tom Matzzie, a strategist for Moveon.org.

Matzzie said his group's efforts are concentrated on "forcing the entire Republican Party to look over the side of the cliff" at the political consequences of continuing to stand by Bush. The groups are focused in particular on Senate Republicans up for reelection next year. "Ultimately we end the war by creating a toxic political environment for war supporters like the Republicans in the Senate," said Matzzie.

One of those 2008 targets, Senator Susan M. Collins of Maine, said that despite the pressure, she was determined to challenge the war on her own terms. The moderate Republican voted with Democrats to allow the withdrawal debate to proceed because "I felt it was important to have an up-or-down vote." But Collins said she held "grave reservations" that "an abrupt withdrawal" could produce "dire consequences."

Collins has crafted her own Iraq proposal, with Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska, to narrow the military's role in Iraq to specific missions such as training Iraqi security forces and counterterrorism activities, while leading to a gradual withdrawal. She said Reid's decision now meant the measure's fate was unclear.

"I think one of the messages that the voters sent last fall that Congress has not heeded is that they're tired of partisan gridlock. They want us to work together, and they want us to get things done," said Collins.