[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: US Democrats to allow more Iraq funding 08 Dec 2007 19:32:28 GMT (Adds Office of Management and Budget reaction, paragraphs 9-11) WASHINGTON, Dec 8 (Reuters) - U.S. House of Representatives Democratic leaders are contemplating legislation that would give President George W. Bush $70 billion in new funds for war but without any timetables for withdrawing troops from Iraq, The Washington Post reported on Saturday. The deal would also include about $11 billion in additional domestic spending through September 2008 that Bush had opposed, said the Post, quoting House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland, who met with the paper's editorial board on Friday. Still unclear, however, is whether House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a vocal opponent of the Iraq war, would go along with the unconditional money for combat after several attempts in the House to bring the fighting to an end. Last month, Pelosi, a California Democrat, said there would be no more votes in the House this year on Iraq funding. Conservative Republicans in the House have warned against the extra domestic spending that Democrats want for programs such as heating assistance for the poor and expanded health and education programs. Referring to the possibility of $70 billion more for the war in a broad budget deal, out of $196 billion Bush has requested, Hoyer told The Washington Post, "Everybody knows he has no intention of signing anything without money for Iraq, unfettered, without constraints. I think that's ultimately going to be the result." 'BUDGET-BUSTING BILL' The House could vote as early as Tuesday on a nearly half-trillion-dollar spending bill to fund an array of government programs. The measure could contain about $30 billion for the war in Afghanistan and other military needs, congressional aides have said. But the Senate would then increase the war funding to about $70 billion, which in turn would be approved by the House, under the scenario Hoyer sketched out. White House Office of Management and Budget Director Jim Nussle indicated that Bush would not sign the legislation, saying the additional domestic spending is "excess" and "not fiscally responsible." "If presented a bill like the one described in today's press reports, the president would veto it," Nussle said in a statement, noting that the administration had not seen the legislation. "If Congress insists on sending the president a budget-busting bill they know he will veto and that will not become law, they should also pass a continuing resolution that keeps the government running and provides the troops in the field the funds they need." Congress is trying to resolve the funding dispute with Bush before taking a long break that could start in a week or two. (Reporting by Richard Cowan; Additional reporting by Deborah Charles; Editing by Xavier Briand) Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||