Unable to block President Bush's plan to send more US troops to Iraq, leading Democrats said yesterday they would seek to limit a 2002 resolution that authorized Bush to go to war, imposing restrictions on how US forces are used.

House Democrats passed a nonbinding resolution last week that opposed Bush's plan to build up US forces in Iraq, but an identical resolution was stopped by procedural tactics in the Senate.

Democratic leaders now say they plan to revisit the resolution authorizing the war, to declare that the mission of US troops in Iraq does not include interceding in a civil war.

"We will be looking at a modification of that authorization in order to limit the mission of American troops to a support mission instead of a combat mission, and that is very different from cutting off funds," said Senator Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Levin, Democrat of Michigan, told "Fox News Sunday" that the "wide-open" authorization approved by Congress four years ago needs to be scaled back to one that "will remove our troops from the middle of a sectarian civil war."

Levin said Congress can modify its original binding authorization measure without infringing on the president's constitutional power to wage war. "We think that that would be constitutional, and it also would move us toward the end of our presence in Iraq," he said.

On CBS's "Face the Nation," Senator Joseph Biden said Congress should make it clear that the US troop mission in Iraq is "to protect against Al Qaeda gaining chunks of territory, [and] training the Iraqi forces." Biden, Democrat of Delaware, chairs the Foreign Relations Committee and is a 2008 presidential hopeful.

Senator Richard Lugar, the top Republican on the committee led by Biden, said that while the new authorization measure was unlikely to become law, it could galvanize more of the same public opposition that fueled last week's votes.

"I think the president would veto it and the veto would be upheld. I think the point that Senator Biden [is] making, however, is that there is public pressure," said Lugar, Republican of Indiana. "Certainly, public opinion is out there that influenced the votes that we have just seen."

Responding to administration allegations that Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction and assisting terrorist groups, Congress in October 2002 authorized use of force against Saddam Hussein. After the March 2003 invasion, the Bush administration said US troops would remain in the region to help Iraq become a democracy.

But the war has raged, growing increasingly unpopular in the United States and unleashing an unrelenting wave of insurgency and sectarian violence in Iraq. The war was on the mind of voters who swept Republicans out of office in the mid term elections and it promises to remain a leading issue in the 2008 presidential campaign.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York , an early leader in the Democratic presidential race, said this weekend on her campaign website that she has proposed setting a 90-day deadline to begin American troop withdrawal from Iraq.

Last week, the House passed a nonbinding resolution opposing Bush's plans to send an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq to bolster security in Baghdad and Anbar province. Senate Republicans used procedural maneuvers on Saturday to block the measure from being debated, but the Democratic motion fell four votes short of the 60 needed to pass.

The White House yesterday said congressional leaders must give Bush's proposal -- which calls for greater involvement by Iraqi forces, as well as a US troop surge -- an opportunity to work. Administration officials rejected Senate Majority leader Harry Reid's assertion that the US-led invasion has become "the worst foreign policy mistake" in the nation's history.

"The war is tough, but the solution is not to get out," press secretary Tony Snow said on CNN's "Late Edition With Wolf Blitzer."

But Lugar said Bush should work more actively with Congress toward a solution.

Republicans are mindful that the next move championed by some Democrats would place restrictions on how funds approved for the Iraq conflict could be used.

In the House, Democrats said proposed restrictions on Bush's request for an additional $93 billion for the military would make it impossible for him to deploy all 21,500 additional troops .

Representative John Murtha, Democrat of Pennsylvania, said the Pentagon would have to meet certain standards for training and equipping the troops, and for ensuring they return home for an adequate time before redeployment.

Republicans say the proposal would deny needed reinforcements to troops and, some argue, it would overstep congressional powers.

Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, said any Democratic effort to cut funding for troops also would be rejected by the public.

Snow said the president understands the importance of debate about the war, and is aware of voters' and lawmakers' anxiety about the war.

"What I would say to members of Congress is: Calm down and take a look at what's going on," Snow said. "Ask yourself a simple question: If you support the troops, would you deny them the reinforcements they think are necessary to complete the mission?' "

But Senator Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska and a potential presidential candidate who has broken with most fellow Republicans in opposing troop buildup, said he is willing to attach strings to future funding.

© Copyright 2007 Boston Globe

###