Boehner stresses non-binding nature of defense resolution

In an apparent effort to downplay a vote on a resolution that will require the president to submit a redeployment plan to Congress as well as issue regular progress reports, House Minority Leader John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) office issued a fact sheet to emphasize that the resolution has no binding properties.

{mosads}Last week Boehner said he would support the bill that passed 55–2 out of the Armed Services Committee last summer, but added that the Pentagon likely already has the plans that Democrats and Republicans who have signed on to the resolution have requested.

“This bill asks the Department of Defense (DoD) to share information, at the appropriate classification levels, about the status of contingency planning already under way for the redeployment of U.S. forces with the appropriate congressional committees — does NOT ask DoD to share the contingency plans themselves,” the fact sheet said.

It notes that liberal blog DailyKos opposed the bill and excoriated those who supported it as the “capitulation caucus.”

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) dismissed Boehner’s comments.

“Mr. Boehner was a leader in one of the most complacent, complicit Congresses in which I have served,” Hoyer told reporters. He said Boehner saw that a lot of members of his conference would vote for the bill, and so “I think he’s trying to diminish its impact.”

Five Republicans spoke in support of the measure, including original co-sponsor Rep. Phil English (Pa.) and Reps. Mike Castle (Del.), Christopher Shays (Conn.), Candice Miller (Mich.) and Michael Turner (Ohio).

Some Democrats, however, thought the bill would serve as political cover for Republicans whose continued support of the war and President Bush have hurt them at home.

Rep. James McGovern (D-Mass.), an Out of Iraq Caucus member, said he saw no reason to vote against the legislation.
“It provides some political cover to Republicans who don’t deserve it, to people who are looking for ways to weasel out of tough votes,” McGovern said. “I don’t particularly think we need more reports, but I don’t object to more reports.”

But Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) called it a “meaningless sham.”

“These PR pieces work nicely for Republicans,” McDermott said. “We already know what Bush’s plan is. He has a plan to be at war until Jan. 20, 2009.”

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), who helped lead the fight to keep the bill off the floor in July, said, “To me, it does not move us forward. That is why I won’t vote for it.”

Asked what she thought of Pelosi’s decision to bring it to a vote, Woolsey said, “It says to me that she changed her mind.”

Mike Soraghan contributed to this report.