GovernmentExecutive.com

Congressional negotiators Wednesday handed President Bush a major victory by approving for Iraq the biggest emergency foreign aid and military bill in the nation's history.

House and Senate conferees meeting through the day approved a measure (H.R. 3289) to fund U.S. fighting forces and reconstruct the war-torn country. Staffers said the total of the bill was $87.5 billion. Bush sought $87 billion in military and reconstruction money, which congressional negotiators said was the largest emergency supplemental bill in history.

In a significant win for Bush, Senate conferees backed off a Senate-passed plan to allocate $8 billion of the $18.6 in the measure's Iraq reconstruction funds in loans, not grants. Bush aides had threatened a veto of the entire measure if there was any requirement that Iraq repay the money.

The funding bill also assists Afghanistan and provides funds for Liberia, Jordan and Sudan as well as money to help Hurricane Isabel and $500 million for California wildfire victims.

House leaders hoped to get House approval of the conference agreement this week with the Senate following suit next week.

During the second meeting of the conferees working out different House and Senate bills, the group agreed to a total of $72 million to enlist National Guard and reservists into the TRICARE military health care benefit plan if they do not have health insurance.

The negotiators also agreed to a Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, plan for an inspector general to watch over the estimated $20 billion in reconstruction funds in the bill. Exact appropriation numbers were not available Wednesday night. The inspector general provision carried an extra $75 million not in House or Senate bills. Another $50 million was approved to pay for reports on how money was being spent.

But both House and Senate negotiators turned down a move by Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., to require the administrator of the temporary Iraq authority - Ambassador L. Paul Bremer - be confirmed by the Senate despite pleas by the veteran lawmaker that Bremer should be more accountable to Congress.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., won approval of $200 million for Liberia, $200 million for Jordan and $20 million for Sudan - more money than was in either House or Senate bill.

House negotiators refused to accept, however, a Leahy plan to crack down on war profiteers with tough criminal penalties despite his argument that "I want people to know they are going to the slammer if they rip off the American taxpayer."

House members said other committees should pass that legislation, not appropriators.

Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S.C., lost an amendment when the House refused to accept his plan to help American embassy hostages in Iran during the 1980s seek compensation from Iran. They are now handicapped because of the so-called "Algiers Accord" agreement when the hostages were released.

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., also failed to get a sense of Congress resolution approved to ask the Justice Department to enter into settlement talks to compensate 17 Americans who were held prisoner in the first Gulf War. Opponents said there should be a general statute covering all prisoners and other victims.

Although the Senate had $1.3 billion earmarked for veterans hospital benefits, it was yanked from the conference agreement with the promise by Stevens he would put it into another appropriations measure for the Veterans Affairs Department.

The most contentious issue has been whether Iraq should be required to repay at least some of the money spent to rebuild it. Democrats, reacting to complaints from constituents that Iraq is rich with oil and should pay back the funds, were rebuffed by Stevens, chairman of the conference, who noted the administration's objections. He also suggested loans would not get to Iraq as fast as direct grants and therefore would delay the eventual return of American forces.

During the end of the session, several amendments were proposed that Byrd complained were unclear. "We're voting in the dark," he said at one point near the end of the meeting when all other senators except he and Stevens among the 29 Senate conferees remained. Eight of the 12 House members were there at the end. One of the amendments Byrd objected to but which was approved would permit administration spending up to 20 percent over allocated amounts.

COMMENTS

• President Bush, John Ashcroft and Donald Rumsfield have used the attacks of Sept 11th and terrorism for justification for violating civil rights and attacking Iraq, using deliberate lies to convince the American public that it was necessary. To now expect the American tax payer to pay for Mr. Bush's deception is wrong. I sincerely hope that the majority of the public realizes how similar the battle in Iraq mimics early Vietnam - we had no right to be there and we need to get our troops out before any more deaths occur. Sharon Rutter Posted November 5, 2003 10:37 AM
• As Congress approves billions of taxpayer money to rebuild Iraq, the Army is operating a web site to recruit contractors for the rebuilding job. Some of these positions seem to place these contractor in positions that under an A-76 study would be deemed "inherently governmental" or GIN. A good example is in hiring a contractor to serve as a Contracting Officer whose job it will be to award to contractors the billions of dollars taxpayers are paying to rebuild Iraq. Talk about the fox watching the hen house. Guess GW won't have to worry about getting chicken for supper on Sunday. Mark Gibson Posted November 3, 2003 7:22 PM
• When the US wins a war we spend money to rebuild the country we just blew apart. When we lose the war (VietNam) we spend nothing. The prez is trying to declare victory in Iraq by spending our tax money before the war is really over. He wants to win so bad he is spending the money now. How else can he campaign on an "I won the war in Iraq" ticket if he can't declare a victory? Duped again by the slick boys in the WH. Don't be fooled Americans, vote the bum out - please!!! GovExec.com reader Posted October 31, 2003 7:20 AM