NYT : Democrats Fall Short in Effort to Shift Course of Iraq War

Democrats Fall Short in Effort to Shift Course of Iraq War

By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN and CARL HULSE | September 19, 2007

WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 — A proposal that Democrats put forward as their best chance of changing the course of the Iraq war died on the Senate floor today, dealing the latest defeat to opponents of the war as Republicans stood firmly behind President Bush.

With other war initiatives seemingly headed for the same fate, Senate Democrats who only two weeks ago proclaimed September to be the month for shifting course in Iraq conceded that they had little chance of success. They said their strategy would now focus on portraying Republicans as opposing any change and on trying to peel support from the White House as the war continues.

Supporters of Mr. Bush’s war strategy declared victory, saying they had firmly beaten back legislative efforts to change course.

“It means that Congress will not intervene in the foreseeable future,” said Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, the independent Democrat who votes with the Republicans on war issues. “The fact that it didn’t get enough votes says that Congress doesn’t have the votes to stop this strategy of success from going forward.” To a large extent, the Senate vote served as crucial test of the war plan that President Bush put forward last week, calling for only gradual reductions in troop levels in Iraq from their current highs and leaving intact by next summer a main body of more than 130,000 troops, about the same number as last February.

The outcome reflected the fact that the strong opposition to the plan voiced by Democrats and a handful of Republicans remains insufficient to overcome the clout of a powerful Republican minority in the Senate that has succeeded all year in staving off Democratic challenges to Mr. Bush’s war policy.

The proposal that failed today would have required that American troops be given as much time at home as they spent overseas before being redeployed.

The measure, put forth by Senator Jim Webb, Democrat of Virginia, fell four votes short of the 60 needed to prevent a filibuster. There were 56 votes in favor, including six Republicans — one fewer than the seven Republicans who joined with the Democrats in July, when the measure also fell four votes short of 60 votes needed.

After the vote, a clearly dejected Mr. Webb said: “You are seeing, as of a week ago, the administration and some of the leading Republicans in here talking about, ‘Hey it’s O.K. that we’re going to be in Iraq for the next 50 years.’ I don’t think it is O.K.”

He continued: “And so we are going to have this debate. It is going to be a long and emotional debate, long meaning in months and perhaps years.”

The July vote on the measure now appears to have been the closest Democrats will have come to bipartisan agreement on legislation that would force President Bush to change his war strategy. And with Republicans now solidly behind the plan outlined by Mr. Bush and Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander in Iraq, Democrats have retreated to a firm antiwar stance.

They are no longer entertaining the kind of compromise measures that some Democrats had proposed earlier this month as an attempt to attract Republican defectors and said they would instead seek opportunities to force votes that would more starkly contrast Republican support for the president with Democrats’ demands for withdrawal.

“The Republican leadership and the White House is getting them all to march in line,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, of New York, who ranks third in the party leadership. “But it is marching further and further away from where America is. We just keep at it. It’s all we can do.” Democratic strategists and party officials said Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, and his colleagues decided to stop trying to strike a deal with Republicans after they found little interest on the other side and could not settle on a plan that would appeal to Republicans but was tough enough to hold Democrats together.

Jim Manley, a spokesman for Mr. Reid, said the majority leader was rebuffed repeatedly in his efforts to find consensus with the Republicans. “It became evident that Republicans were not willing to break with the president,” he said.

After the Webb proposal was defeated, Republicans failed to get 60 votes for a nonbinding resolution that said American troops should get as much respite time as possible before redeployment.

On Thursday and Friday, the Senate is expected to vote on several other war proposals by the Democrats, including one by Senator Russell D. Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, would require most American troops to be pulled out of Iraq by next June and would then cut financing for continuing military operations.

Another proposal by Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the Democratic chairman of the Armed Services Committee, would require a shift of American troops away from combat by next summer. Neither has much chance of winning 60 votes.

The Senate will also vote on a plan by Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, that calls for a greater reliance on diplomacy to forge a political solution in Iraq and end the war.

But Democrats seemed resigned to having little chance of influencing the war strategy anytime soon.

Mr. Webb’s plan came under sharp attack by the Pentagon as interfering with complex troop deployment schedules, and late last week the Bush administration put intense pressure on Republican lawmakers when it became clear that Mr. Webb was close to securing enough Republican votes to win.

And it was dealt a death blow when Senator John W. Warner, Mr. Webb’s fellow Virginian, and one of the most respected Republican voices on military affairs, announced dramatically on the Senate floor today that he was withdrawing his support for the proposal based on information provided by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and other senior military officials.

“I endorsed it,” Mr. Warner said of the Webb proposal. “I intend now to cast a vote against it.”

In explaining his decision, Mr. Warner said he had been convinced, at a meeting earlier in the day with senior military officials, that the Webb plan could not be carried out without causing havoc for the armed forces, potentially lengthening tours in Iraq. Mr. Warner also met personally with Secretary Gates, a longtime friend, on Monday.

But Mr. Warner’s change in position echoed a wider unwillingness by Republicans to break ranks with the Bush administration.

The two Republican senators who are running for president — John McCain of Arizona and Sam Brownback of Kansas — both voted against the Webb proposal. The four Democratic senators who are presidential candidates — Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Barack Obama of Illinois, Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware and Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut — _ all voted in favor of the measure.

The continuing partisan divide frustrated some moderate lawmakers in both parties who are anxious to help shape Iraq policy as well as send a message to constituents that they are doing their part to end an increasingly unpopular war. But there appeared to be little likelihood that any of those measures would move forward until next month when Congress must consider a supplemental military spending bill.

Mr. Reid’s spokesman said the decision to stick with a hard-deadline for withdrawal was endorsed by Senator Levin, who earlier had signaled a willingness to soften his proposal in a bid to win Republican converts.

Mr. Reid traveled on Monday to New York City to help raise money for antiwar groups, and while Democrats remain under substantial pressure from antiwar groups, Mr. Manley and others said that event was scheduled weeks ago and had no bearing on the legislative change of tack.

Democrats said the inability to make any progress on changing the administration’s war strategy through legislation was forcing lawmakers to consider trying to add conditions to spending on the war in upcoming appropriations bills, an approach they have been shied away from in the past because it can be cast as pulling out support from troops on the ground.

Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, who worked to defeat the Webb plan, acknowledged that the solid Republican support for the war could have political repercussions.

“The Republicans own this war,” said Mr. Graham, adding that the public is beginning to recognize larger stakes in the conflict beyond the control of Iraq. “If it goes bad, the nation loses and the Republican party loses disproportionately compared to the Democratic Party.”

David Stout contributed reporting.