Legislators mull timing of supplemental vote

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), looking for a way to move House Democrats’ becalmed Iraq strategy, may wait until 2008 before bringing up the next wartime supplemental spending bill.

They have, however, agreed that two relatively uncontroversial bills — banning “war profiteering” and reining in Iraq contractors — should be quickly brought to the floor.

{mosads}“The supplemental appropriations bill doesn’t appear to be coming up anytime soon,” Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) said after meeting with Pelosi. Democratic aides confirmed that there are discussions of the bill being delayed as far into the future as January.

A group of legislators working to craft that strategy has yet to decide on a recommendation for Pelosi on an overarching strategy on the supplemental, which is considered the policy-setting legislation on the war.

 A flurry of meetings on Iraq strategy has resulted in the floating of new ideas but no coherent strategy for how to proceed on Iraq policy. Among those ideas are a liberal proposal limiting the size of the U.S. embassy in Baghdad to prevent it from becoming a military outpost, strengthening a centrist proposal by Reps. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii) and John Tanner (D-Tenn.) that had been watered down to win Republican support in committee, and developing legislation to order a “diplomatic surge.”

“There’s going to be a package of legislation with everything from war profiteering to withdrawal,” Abercrombie said following one of the meetings late Tuesday. “We’re going to take this as far as we’re able and pass it in such a way that the Senate will have to come to grips with it.”

On the House floor Wednesday, lawmakers passed, 341-79, an amendment condemning a newspaper advertisement by the liberal group MoveOn.org attacking Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq, as “General Betray Us.”

Legislators are set to meet again Thursday to continue their discussion about recommendations on Iraq. The meeting comes after an intense day of closed-door discussions colored by concern by the leaders of the Out of Iraq Caucus that they were being excluded from the process.

Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) has assembled an ad hoc group to look at the dozens of Iraq bills introduced by Democrats and develop a floor strategy. The group includes members of the Out of Iraq Caucus, but not its founders, Reps. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) and Waters. It also includes Abercrombie and Tanner, who have clashed with the three Californians in recent weeks about Iraq strategy.

 After the Senate failed to pass Sen. Jim Webb’s (D-Va.) “dwell time” bill last week, Larson asked the group to make recommendations on a new strategy.

But the centrist tilt of the group alarmed the three Out of Iraq leaders, who sometimes call themselves the “triad.” Their concern led to an occasionally charged Tuesday afternoon meeting in Pelosi’s office with the three Californians, other Out of Iraq caucus members and Larson.

Pelosi sought to ameliorate the anti-war leaders by expressing her frustration with Senate Republicans on the Iraq issue, saying there’s no longer any need to reach out to them. She assured the triad members no one was being excluded. There also was some discussion that Abercrombie and Tanner’s withdrawal legislation could be pushed through on a fast-track vote on the suspension calendar.

That meeting also resulted in the triad members being invited to Larson’s meeting later that night in a Capitol meeting room. The hour-and-a-half meeting produced consensus on “war profiteering” and contracting. The profiteering bill, by Abercrombie, would make corruption in Iraq subject to prosecution by U.S. authorities, while the contracting bill by Rep. David Price (D-N.C.) would make contractors subject to U.S. law.

Woolsey, who attended for the Out of Iraq leaders, pushed along with Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) for a tougher approach, seeking to force Republicans to vote again on the withdrawal of troops.

Other members discussed changing Abercrombie-Tanner back to its original form, stating that war authorization had expired and ordering the Bush administration to develop a withdrawal plan, along with the idea of a “diplomatic surge.”

No decisions were made.

“Our job is to present it to the leadership and the leadership will make a decision,” Larson said as he left the meeting.