|
Edited on Tue Jul-31-07 01:09 PM by mzmolly
Aides cited additional reasons not to hold the vote on the Murtha amendment.
The measure triggered opposition from liberals because it did not specify an end date for the withdrawal. If such a date had been included to mollify anti-war lawmakers, it would have ignited a firestorm of opposition from moderate Democrats and Republicans, the aides said.
Moreover, they said, many Democrats believe they may be better situated to push for a withdrawal in September, when several defense measures will be pending.
...
The House is likely to consider two other amendments to the Defense spending bill, which is expected to come to the floor on Wednesday. One would close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, in 180 days and provide just half of President Bush’s $225 million fiscal 2008 request for the facility.
The other amendment would require troops to be fully trained and equipped prior to combat deployments. Murtha, who may sponsor both amendments, said last week that the training provision would cause a de facto troop drawdown in Iraq.
In context, it makes more sense.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
