Common Dreams NewsCenter
National Conference for Media Reform
 
     
Home | Newswire | Contacting Us | About Us | Donate | Sign-Up | Archives
   
 
     
 

Discuss this story Discuss this story Print This Post Print This Post E-Mail This Article
 
 

Senate Approves $70 Billion To Continue Wars

WASHINGTON - The US House of Representatives was expected to vote Wednesday on a Senate-approved budget bill for 2008 that includes 70 billion dollars for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.1219 08

In a boost to President George W. Bush, the Senate voted late Tuesday to approve the catch-all 555 billion dollar budget bill, adding extra war funds without any of the restrictions that Democrats hoped to pin on their release, such as linking them to a withdrawal date for US troops.

The House of Representatives’ version passed Monday had included 31 billion dollars solely for US-led efforts in Afghanistan but none for Iraq.

House lawmakers are now only to vote on the war funding portion added by the Senate, which was approved by a vote of 70-25. If it passes the House, Bush has indicated he will sign the spending package.

Amid deep differences with the Congress over the Iraq war, the White House had threatened to veto the entire spending bill if it contained no funding for Iraq.

“Obviously, the full funding that we requested since February is what the troops need — not just what they want, but what they need. But this will help us get through this period,” said Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino.

Democrats, who took over the US Congress in November 2006 elections fueled by anger at the war in Iraq, have tried without success to use their power of the purse to impose a timetable for withdrawal from the strife-torn country where nearly 4,000 US troops have died since the March 2003 invasion.

Democrats reportedly also gave up several billion dollars’ worth of other budget demands rejected by Bush, in order to see the spending measure passed before the year-end recess. They have also been concerned about being seen as unsupportive of US troops in battle at Christmas.

Democratic House majority leader Steny Hoyer told CNN that the House initially passed the 31 billion dollars in funding for Afghanistan “so that we could confront terrorism and defeat the Taliban which was, after all, the site from which this country was attacked and which, frankly, we have distracted our attention from.”

The package, known as the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, includes 11 of 12 annual appropriations bills, leaving out defense which has already been approved by lawmakers.

Among other things, the bill funds veterans’ health care, emergency spending on border security, firefighting to tackle massive wildfires on the West Coast, bridge repair and even funds for peacekeeping in Darfur.

Republican Senator Mitch McConnell, who introduced the amendment to add funding for the Iraq war, said the House version “underfunds” troops in Iraq. He hailed the advances made by General David Petraeus’ plan to “surge” the number of US troops.

“Since the implementation of the Petraeus Plan, we’ve marveled at the improving security situation in and around Baghdad. Attacks on US troops are down. Civilian casualties in Baghdad are down 75 percent.

“There is simply no question that on the military and tactical levels, the Petraeus Plan has been a tremendous success.

“Even those of us who have disagreed on this war have always agreed on one thing: troops in the field will not be left without the resources they need.”

However, Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy voiced his opposition to the Republican plan.

“It’s wrong for Congress to write still another blank check to the President for the war. It’s obvious that President Bush wants to drag this process out month after month, so he can hand off his Iraqi policy to the next president.”

© 2007 Agence France Presse

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • NewsVine
  • StumbleUpon
  • YahooMyWeb
  • Technorati
 

33 Comments so far

  1. maxpayne December 19th, 2007 1:44 pm

    One war spending package after another, it never ends. In fact, the Democrats are upping the spending even faster than the GOP despite our best hopes that Congress would actually cut down on war spending if the Democrats were elected to Congress. May the Democrats be PUNISHED in 2008 !

  2. WTF December 19th, 2007 1:44 pm

    :(

    ‘Nuff said.

  3. peace808 December 19th, 2007 2:10 pm

    Yes, this is likely that this is another bait and switch. And the House voted on a spending bill earlier this week with *no money* for Iraq - I believe this came about through heavy constituent pressure. Call your congressional office, again, NOW.

  4. catbutt December 19th, 2007 3:06 pm

    Earmarks, spending, the war. Why are we having a contest to spend. We’re in a recession god damn it.

  5. landmark123 December 19th, 2007 4:09 pm

    Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Steny Hoyer and Rom Emanuel all have to go.

  6. KEM PATRICK December 19th, 2007 4:15 pm

    It was my understanding our treasury doesn’t have $70 billion dollars left. Are they going to borrow this amount from China, or just print the bills, or is it an IOU to the Social Security fund? Maybe Halliburtn is lending it? We can’t afford health care for children though. Ya know what, I don’t know what I’m babbling about here either. ~Bye.

  7. kirby December 19th, 2007 4:16 pm

    This is so depressing, I just can’t stand it. The entire Congress has to go. what is the matter with those idiots? Thi llegal war has got to stop!!

    Anne Kirby

  8. rtdrury December 19th, 2007 4:20 pm

    So the prescription for being a Good Demok, to get your token legislation passed, is to first re-fill the petro tank of the bloody empire steamroller. SPLENDID STRATEGY! But only the top 1% of Demoks are evil. The bottom 99% are seriously misguided.

    Mitch McConnell had to wait 4 1/2 years for some sign that he could spin in the occupation’s favor. But the insurgents are simply choosing their battles more effectively at this point. They haven’t surrendered Iraq to the invaders. They haven’t surrendered the oil to the invaders. Mitch McConnell is simply cooking up a holiday feast of delusions for the hungry.

  9. verlhite December 19th, 2007 4:39 pm

    I am so sad that this nations government has deteriorated to this point. I am also very concerned about the future. Our country is now in the midst of a finacial disaster that may have devastating effects. Our leaders seem to be morally lost. It seems as though things are getting worse every day. I am afraid that nasty things are going to happen.

  10. ianjohnsa December 19th, 2007 4:45 pm

    I think maybe it’s time to ask ourselves just how corrupt and dysfunctional we are willing to allow our political system to become before we start considering whether reform through the current system is possible (even desireable?) Is it time to rethink the fundamentals of the system? Is there another way to create change? Do we have to keep hoping that one day soon congress will start listening? How long do we wait? I believe that we should never put these kinds of questions too far out of mind. Am I in the great minority? Are most people satisfied, on the whole, with how things are going?

  11. landmark123 December 19th, 2007 4:47 pm

    What does Jack Murtha and David Obey have to say about this? Two weeks ago they were talking about a spending bill with a timetable for withdrawal. No more blank checks, remember. Have they been silenced? How can we get Murtha to be the Democratic majority leader?

  12. ike kay December 19th, 2007 5:10 pm

    BETTER, HOW CAN WE START A NEW PARTY AND DEFEAT ALL THESE SO CALLED LEADERS? HOW CAN WE GET A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT CAN BE ELECTED WITH CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM WITHOUT SPECIAL INTEREETS BUYING POLITICIANS.

    HOW CAN WE GET THE GOVERNMENT TO GIVE ALL QUALIFIED CANDIDATES THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY PAID FOR OUT OF TAXES AND A SPECIFIED AMOUNT OF AIRTIME GIVEN TO ALL CANDIDATES FREELY?

    HOW CAN WE STOP THESE CROOKED ELECTIONS OF THE POWER ELITE?

  13. judi December 19th, 2007 5:35 pm

    Istead of giving in to this spoiled brat and his great “war”, Congress should have ignored Bush’s demands’s and instead move toward impeachment of both Bush and Cheney. Weak-kneed, foolish Democrats, letting down the American public once again. Forget about being called traitors for not funding an illegal war. Lives are at stake. If Bush doesn’t get what he wants, he will probably have a tantrum and fire nukes at Iran, right? That must be the kicker that keeps the Democratic Congress tied down. What else?

  14. lillulu December 19th, 2007 5:54 pm

    Every few weeks the corrupt Congress gives the unelected Chimp hundreds of billions of dollars for the illegal war in Iraq. Does anyone know why the troops are still in Afghanistan, by the way? They destroyed al-Qaida’s training camp, so why are they still there?

    This country is disgusting. I’m sorry I had to say it, but it’s the truth.

  15. tobee4 December 19th, 2007 6:22 pm

    These people DO NOT REPRESENT ME they need to be OUT OF OFFICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    They are a 4 plus disgrace.

  16. kelmer December 19th, 2007 6:34 pm

    What was that Nader said about Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee?

    Oh who cares? The Democratic ass kissers are going to be telling us how we need to support the lesser of two evils next November.

  17. Ouroboros December 19th, 2007 6:35 pm

    Wooohooooooooo……

    The War on Terrorism just got 20 years longer.

    Now if only we can manage to keep this country on its feet for another 50 years….

  18. thomas j hussey December 19th, 2007 6:40 pm

    The U.S., Israel, and Great Britain are the 21st-century version of the 1930s Axis. But the German Reichstag dissolved itself after Hitler ruled by decree following the Reichstag fire, so they weren’t costing the German taxpayers whie Hitler went his merry way. This worthless Congress of ours continues to draw its pay even as it works against the public interest.
    There is a ray of hope. Cindy Sheehan is running in the Democratic primary against Nancy Pelosi. Give her your support. She might end up succumbing to the Washington virus, but she’s worth a chance.

  19. shakker December 19th, 2007 7:53 pm

    Borrow and spend war mongering republicans and spineless democrats are drilling holes in the bottom of the ship of state as fast as they can.

    They should get the credit they deserve at the polls. Vote Kucinich or Green party or vote defensively. BUT VOTE. Staying home signals contentment.

  20. thedeed December 19th, 2007 8:57 pm

    The roll call was 272 - 142 with 141 Democrats voting against the war funding. Which is the party of war? The party of 1 vote against the war? I think not. 141 is not enough. If we want to win you need to elect more of the type that vote against the war, and I think that means Democrats. Of course, you could take a 1 in 142 chance that you can elect a Republican that will vote against the war, but I’d rather take my chances with the Dems.

  21. ejmurphy414 December 19th, 2007 9:25 pm

    Millions of us voters are disgusted by the Democrats’ lack of spine. They are as bad as the Republicans on funding this endless war.

  22. thedeed December 19th, 2007 9:40 pm

    No, they’re not as bad as Republicans. Only 1 Republican voted against the war, 141 Democrats voted against the war.

  23. citizen1 December 19th, 2007 9:53 pm

    Ah well…
    DEMOCRATS = BUSH ENABLERS

    Recall the entire US government.

    Nothing but a revolution is our only hope.

    Good bye USA.

  24. Grappa December 19th, 2007 9:59 pm

    If you want to make a difference, make sure members of your family do not join the military to advance this crime. Let them that support this war, fight it. Don’t pay any attention to the talking heads about how well Iraq is doing,its all B.S.. Those people of the middle East know this occupation is bankrupting the U.S..
    The economy can’t be saved ,it is beyond repair. When the full force of this spending is actualized, the dollar won’t be worth the paper their printed on.

  25. Doom n Gloom December 20th, 2007 1:38 am

    Darkness is a strong power. Just as the universe was created from darkness, we too are capable of creating light from the darkness. We must reach into the darkness with a cleansed and loving spirit devoid of hatred and will the light into our physical world. To cleanse we must honor life, all life including the unborn. This is the path to a better place.

  26. MRFOAD December 20th, 2007 8:18 am

    I am sick and tired for these pussies in congress handing Bush everything that he wants. I thought the Democrats were elected to get us out of Iraq. We might as well have voted for Chenney for all the good that it did.

    I am sure glad that I never had children because I couldn’t live with myself knowing how much debt that I had left on their heads.

  27. Nietzsche December 20th, 2007 9:30 am

    Pat Robertson says we have a Godly man in the White House. He is apparently correct. George offers the solace of faith in God to all who need help. It costs nothing. As James Russell Lowell says “God himself may be had for the asking”.

    But if this is true why does it cost so much when God tells George to torture, rape, and murder? Is God unable to accomplish his will without George’s help? What is God going to do without George? I have a feeling God is going to tell George not to leave office, and that he must do whatever he has to do to remain the leader of the free world.

  28. bill December 20th, 2007 9:52 am

    Tired of oil wars? Stop autosprawl.

    http://frepubtra.blogspot.com/

    .

  29. human825 December 20th, 2007 10:08 am

    Is there any difference between Pat Rob….and OBL and GWB?

  30. ezeflyer December 20th, 2007 11:19 am

    Dems:

    Don’t worry about us thinking you don’t support the troops if you don’t give Bush more billions. Worry about our firing you for it.

  31. Ragdoll December 20th, 2007 12:43 pm

    Right on!

    When will some bright urageous leader turn around this stupid “support the troops” argument?

    Do you really think Bush wold dare keep the troops in Iraq WITHOUT support? It would be his duty as commander-in-chief to bring them home! It’s past time to call his bluff!!!

    There must be some military analysts capable of estimating what the “return trip” of ALL the troops would cost so Congress can allocate that much and no more!

    This is the cost of not impeaching Bush and Cheney, not to mention the lives of more soldiers in peril because “Impeachment is off the table.”

  32. sung425 December 20th, 2007 2:48 pm

    Most if not all politicans are profiteering from this so called war on terror, whether from lobbyist or direct donations from individual companies. Note the Farm Subsidies bill that was passed out last week, or the $13 billion tax relief to the big oil companies. Is it no wonder that many congress critters will not seek reelection next term? They are cashing in and bailing out before the US becomes an economic basket case. And many still believe that our GI’s are worth dying over to protect this failed government? There’s nothing to protect.

  33. Gail December 20th, 2007 7:34 pm

    U.S. CONGRESS: The coalition of the willing or coerced?

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)

 
   FAIR USE NOTICE  
  This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 
 
 
Common Dreams NewsCenter
A non-profit news service providing breaking news & views for the progressive community.
Home | Newswire | Contacting Us | About Us | Donate | Sign-Up | Archives

© Copyrighted 1997-2008
www.commondreams.org