Even though President Bush has vowed to veto the war bill that was passed by Congress this week, Democrats should continue to be confident in their attempts to hasten the removal of troops in Iraq.
The bill was approved by the U.S. House of Representatives Wednesday by a vote of 218-208 and the U.S. Senate passed it with a 51-46 vote Thursday, but both numbers fall far short of the two-thirds needed to override the president’s promised veto.
The legislation would provide for $124 billion in war spending, seeks the removal of most combat forces from Iraq by spring 2008, and would begin the withdrawal by Oct. 1.
But even though Bush’s expected veto means the bill is going nowhere fast, it is important that the Democrats continue to question the war and force the president to come face-to-face with the fact that many within our government ““ and the general public ““ disapprove of the direction the war is taking. In a recent CNN poll, 61 percent of participants said they disapprove of the war in Iraq.
It is difficult to say how the Democrats should respond to the veto. Rep. John Murtha, D-Penn., said he would be in favor of providing robust financial support to troops for the next two months with the benchmarks for assessment of the Iraqi government, but without the specific timetable for withdrawal, according to The New York Times.
Regardless of how the Democrats approach the veto, their response should not be limited to the legislative sphere of influence if they want to build effective support for their withdrawal plans.
This support must come from the general public.
Democrats need to mobilize their resources in order to influence the public opinion of the war.
Republicans will no doubt be taking up the same plan to build support against the schedule for troop withdrawal, which makes it all the more imperative for Democrats to make the focus of their efforts the entire United States, not only Capitol Hill.
Of course, the issue most present in the minds of most Americans, and therefore most pressing for Democrats to engage, will be “supporting the troops,” a term that has been thrown around so much that it has been essentially devalued.
Many Republicans have called any plan for withdrawal an admission of defeat indicative of a lack of support for the troops.
But Democrats can easily use what seems like an ideological weakness and turn it to their advantage.
They should show that supporting the troops should go beyond providing military weapons to continue fighting or simply sticking a magnetic bumper sticker on their cars. It should be using the money intended for military operations to help troops support their families and to help them get a higher education.
The Democrats certainly keep a sense of humor in their fight for withdrawal, planning to send the bill to the White House on the fourth anniversary of the president’s May 1, 2003 speech, when he announced the end of major military operations while aboard an aircraft carrier in the presence of a banner reading “Mission Accomplished.”
Certainly, the Democrats disagree; the mission has not been accomplished, and must be ended before more lives are lost.