After 12,000 miles, talking points intact

Flying into Baghdad in a military Black Hawk helicopter last month, Rep. Jon Porter (R-Nev.) reached for his camera to snap photos of signs that American policy was working in Iraq.

“I can see it in the streets. People were playing soccer. Cars were in the streets,” Porter said. “It seemed to me the surge is working.”

{mosads}But on a similar flight a few days earlier, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) strapped on body armor and came away with a very different impression.

“Anywhere we went, we had to get on a Black Hawk helicopter with machine guns pointing out,” Schakowsky said. “It’s obvious the security situation is just terrible.”

During the August break, more than 40 lawmakers made the 6,200-mile trip to Baghdad. In bipartisan delegations, they met the same generals, sheiks and Iraqi politicians and saw the same sights in 120-degree heat. Some, like Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) and Rep. Bud Cramer (D-Ala.), got shot at together.

But they still came home with two sets of talking points, generally the same ones they left with. Republicans did not come back ready to withdraw troops, as the political zeitgeist suggested before the August break. That portends no resolution for the political fight over the war in Congress.

“I’m afraid we’re going to see a continual stalemate,” Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.) said after seeing Iraq and surveying the political landscape. “It’s going to take a national referendum, which is the 2008 election.”

In speeches, teleconferences and interviews after their returns, Republicans touted military successes and said withdrawal would undercut hard-fought military gains.

Democrats called the surge unsustainable and, while careful to praise the hard work of the military, said it has failed to move the Iraqi government to take control of the country’s destiny.

Almost to a person, they praised Gen. David Petraeus but trashed the Iraqi politicians. Moran complained that one senior Iraqi politician kept watching a cartoon show on television while meeting with his delegation.

“Going there is helpful, but it basically confirmed what I believed before,” said Rep. Tom Allen (D-Maine). “I’ve been living with this for five years.”

There were exceptions on both sides. Rep. Brian Baird (D-Wash.) braved the wrath of Democratic leadership to declare he no longer can support immediate withdrawal. Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), who would later announce his retirement, bucked President Bush by calling for significant troop withdrawal by Christmas.

More defections are possible. Sen. George Voinovich (Ohio), a centrist Republican who has criticized the war but voted against withdrawal, traveled to Iraq from Aug. 25-28. He has declined to discuss it publicly until he has had time to ponder it, causing anti-war activists to speculate that he may be preparing to take a more anti-war tack. He is expected to discuss his thoughts on the trip when Congress returns this week.

But the journey to Iraq may have been less important to some members than their August trip home. Activists on both sides spent much of the recess pressuring members on their Iraq votes. Members of the Americans Against Escalation in Iraq protested at members’ offices and held a “Take a Stand Day.” Freedom’s Watch, fronted by former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, announced a $15 million ad campaign to pressure Republican lawmakers to stick with Bush and the war.

And members have already been to Iraq many times. Rep. Jim Moran is losing track. Asked how many times he’d made the trip, he said, “Oh, three or four times.” Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) returned from his 18th trip during the break.

For other members, it was their first time. Freshman Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.) talked of his many attempts to get on an Iraq congressional delegation trip, or codel, before landing a seat on the Veterans Affairs trip last month.

“I was on a list a couple of times and I finally got called,” Bilirakis said.

Another reason lawmakers saw little to change their minds may be that members who went were true believers. None of the 17 Republicans who voted against the “surge” in February went to check its progress. Few if any of the anti-withdrawal Democrats made the trip. And Porter was one of the few Republicans who had protesters back at his district office when he landed in the Green Zone.

The month of codels presaged what is expected to be an intense month of political maneuvering on the Iraq issue, though it’s not clear what votes will be held.

In a conference call with the Democratic Caucus in late August, leaders said they planned to highlight Government Accountability Office (GAO) findings that the Iraqi government has failed to meet most benchmarks for success.

The GAO report is to serve as a counterpoint to what Democrats expect will be a rosier report from Petraeus. It will feature in a series of hearings starting Wednesday, the day after it is formally released as part of Democrats’ coordinated pushback.

Petraeus is set to unveil his report, one of the most anticipated opinions in Washington since Bush v. Gore, in hearings on Monday.

But the legislative agenda on the war has not been set. A range of options remains, including:

A bill by Reps. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii) and John Tanner (D-Tenn.) ordering President Bush to submit a plan for withdrawal within 60 days. The legislation fell by the wayside in the final days before recess because of objections from the left that it would give cover to fence-sitting Republicans.

Legislation by Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.) on “dwell time” and readiness requirements.

Absolute withdrawal language from House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) and Rep. James McGovern (D-Mass).

House leaders say they want to wait until after Petraeus delivers his report to decide how to proceed.

“It’s a matter of making sure we have all the data,” said Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.), a member of leadership who chairs an ad hoc committee reviewing the 42 bills proposed by Democrats on the Iraq war.

Larson said he “fully anticipates” that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will seek a vote on a “modified” version of the withdrawal legislation passed in July on a largely party-line vote. Moran said that the Iraq war supplemental spending bill by Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) would include withdrawal language.

But pro-war Republicans say they’ve stopped the political momentum that had been expected to cause centrist Republicans to break with Bush after Petraeus delivers his report. They note that even anti-war Democrats are forced to acknowledge military successes by the surge.

“My desire to give victory a chance was emboldened,” said Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.). “I think politically, the Democrats have a real problem. The encouraging news we’re hearing is bad news for Democrats.”

Democrats, however, say the military progress was to be expected, and is not enough when the Iraqi government won’t step up to the task.

“Of course, when you add more of the finest military in the world, there’s going to be more security where they are,” said Tauscher. “The Iraqis don’t seem capable or conscious of what they should be doing.”