Redstate

Does Carl Levin Know When To Fold 'Em?

By Pejman Yousefzadeh Posted in Democrats | Featured Stories — Comments (3) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

One of his chairmen appears to be talking out of turn(read on):

The Senate will not stop paying for the Iraq war or relent from insisting that President Bush keep pressing the Baghdad government for a negotiated end to the violence, a top Democrat said Sunday.

Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, the Senate Armed Service Committee chairman, took issue with an effort by Majority Leader Harry Reid to cut off money for the war next year as a way to end U.S. involvement.

"We're not going to vote to cut funding, period," Levin said. "But what we should do, and we're going to do, is continue to press this president to put some pressure on the Iraqi leaders to reach a political settlement."

Bush has asked Congress for more than $100 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan this year. The House and Senate have approved the money, but their bills seek to wind down the war by including timelines for troops to come home something Bush will not accept.

The Senate bill would require a U.S. troop exit to begin within 120 days, with a completion goal of March 31, 2008. The House bill would order all combat troops out by Sept. 1, 2008.

Democratic leaders have not negotiated a final version to send the president. Bush has made clear he will veto it, which will start the process all over.

"We're going to fund the troops. We always have," Levin said. He added, "We're very strong in supporting the troops, but we're also strong on putting pressure on the Iraqi leaders to live up to their own commitments without that political settlement on their part, there is no military solution."

Carl Levin--it should be clear--is certainly no dummy. He likely understands that all of the reports of earmarks placed in the military appropriations bill for the purpose of attracting Congressional votes only served to taint the process by which this appropriations bill passed Congress. The more the news of this taint gets out, the worse Congress and its majority leadership looks.

The only question is whether Levin is speaking on his own behalf or whether he is acting as a stalking horse for Reid in an effort to allow Reid to pull back from his position threatening a cutoff of funds. In either case, the White House likely takes heart from this development, and it adds to the belief that the White House--for all of the bluster being directed at it from Capitol Hill--will be able to get a clean appropriations bill in the end of it has the moxie to exercise a veto against the current appropriations bill. And by all indications, that is precisely what the White House will do.