Government Executive - Authors - Keith Koffler

OMB director lambastes war spending bill

Keith Koffler — Wed, 21 May 2008 00:00:00 -0400

Office of Management and Budget Director James Nussle Wednesday denounced the supplemental spending bills emerging from the House and Senate, saying that President Bush will reject them and that the Defense Department will soon have to take drastic measures to address the absence of needed funding.

But Nussle, who spoke at the White House, did not rule out Bush allowing at least some domestic spending in the measure, saying that the president's top priorities are ensuring that the legislation does not exceed his $108 billion cap and that it does not include provisions that tie the hands of military leaders.

Such provisions, he suggested, would surely result in a veto.

Nussle made clear Bush's unhappiness with the domestic spending on the bill, accusing Democrats of holding the troops hostage over the party's domestic agenda.

He noted that expanded unemployment benefits are provided under the legislation even though the unemployment rate is below 5 percent. He charged that if Congress was really interested in more domestic spending it would try to speed the appropriations process instead of stalling it, alleging that lawmakers have decided to "punt" on the regular order spending bills until next year in the hope of getting a better deal with a Democratic president.

Nussle said that if the funding is not provided by June 15, the Defense Department will run out of money to pay troops, including those fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The delay will also result in the Defense Department having to play a "shell game" by redirecting money from other programs to meet critical needs. Furlough notices will have to begin going out for civilian employees in June.

Nussle also accused Democrats of ignoring bipartisan veterans' benefits legislation and of "air-dropping" into the supplemental a bill that had not been considered.

]]>

Bush's plan to halve earmarks getting mixed reviews

Christian Bourge and Keith Koffler — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:00:00 -0500

President Bush will veto fiscal 2009 appropriations bills that do not halve the number and cost of earmarks and will issue an executive order Tuesday directing federal agencies to ignore future earmarks that are added in report language rather than actual legislation.

"If they're going to be in legislative language, that means that they have to be open for all to see, and it means that they would have to be actually voted on," said White House Press Secretary Dana Perino, who announced the plan Monday.

Bush will not challenge earmarks included in the reports of recently approved fiscal 2008 spending bills.

"The president decided that he needed to give the Congress a very clear indication of what he was going to do," Perino said.

Though it will be left for another president to enforce the executive order, the White House appears to be calculating that future leaders will be reluctant to take a stand that may look supportive of earmarking by abolishing the order. "Remember, an executive order remains in place unless a future president decides to rescind it or change it," Perino said. "So we think this is a good, solid action."

Democrats were quick to criticize Bush's proposal, while some Republicans complained that it did not go far enough. "I'm disappointed the president missed this historic opportunity to stop thousands of wasteful earmarks under pressure from big spenders in Congress," said Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C. House Minority Leader Boehner, R-Ohio, applauded Bush's action but said in a statement, "We believe Congress should go even further, by adopting an immediate moratorium on all earmarks and establishing a panel to determine ways to end wasteful pork-barrel spending." Boehner first outlined those steps over the weekend at the House Republican retreat and in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. Pelosi dismissed that request, and noted that Republicans had no problems with earmarks when they controlled Congress.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., lashed out at Bush's proposal, arguing in a morning conference call with reporters that lawmakers are obligated to "take care of the needs of their constituents." Added Pelosi, "if the president wants to do away with earmarks, we should do away with presidential earmarks as well." She added that legislative discretion remains important.

"One person's earmark is another person's absolute necessity. Those are the kinds of distinctions we are happy to make," Pelosi said.

]]>

Pork reigns supreme at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue

Keith Koffler — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 00:00:00 -0500

But among the most compulsive earmarkers, Bush stands out as the most prolific practitioner of them all, according to preliminary statistics compiled by Taxpayers for Common Sense.

The nonpartisan watchdog group, which has helped stoke public outrage over earmarks, reports the total value of 1,648 presidential "earmarks" in the fiscal 2008 omnibus appropriations bill at $16.38 billion.

That compares to the $15.33 billion value of the 11,145 congressional earmarks the group has identified in the omnibus and in the enacted fiscal 2008 Defense spending bill.

The presidential figure, though, includes requests made by the president solely or jointly with lawmakers.

Rank hypocrisy? Well, perhaps not precisely.

Bush aides say their earmarks get a full review within federal agencies. With such vetting, they are deemed justifiable spending requests, unlike the sausage ground out by Congress, they say.

"The president lays out all of his proposals clearly and provides cost justification for each in the budget every year, whereas Congress remains addicted to air-dropping last-minute spending projects into spending legislation without any merit or reason [or] theme aside from seniority and district representation," said an OMB spokesman. "That's the key difference."

And up to a point, the anti-government waste crowd agrees.

"That's really where the system is working -- when the agency and the president request funding for a project," said David Williams of Citizens Against Government Waste, another earmark-hating watchdog group that has been more critical of the Democratic-led Congress. CAGW did not even count presidential earmarks this year.

"It's really checks and balances -- an agency is vetting the process," said Williams.

Congressional leaders assert they put the smell test to lawmaker requests, too. "Earmarks here go through a review by Appropriations committee members and staff," said one House Democratic leadership aide.

"It's still an earmark," says Taxpayers for Common Sense's Steve Ellis of the presidential variety. "It's still possible that earmarks are being targeted to benefit particular entities, companies or locations."

Consider, for example, the president's judgment that the F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming needs $14,600 to "Renovate Historic Dormitories."

Camp Pendleton in California needs $8,510 for a physical fitness center. And the president sought hundreds of millions of dollars for water projects in the Energy and Water spending portion of the omnibus.

Williams said that even though the requests are reviewed by the agencies, monkey business might occur after the money is appropriated, when White House officials may exert influence on how the cash is actually spent. His group has been unable to track the process. "We have not been able to crack that code yet," he said.

Ellis observed that presidential earmarks help provide cover for lawmakers to push their own pet projects.

They often team up with the president to "plus up" his original request if it is directed toward their state or district.

The Energy and Water Appropriations bill is particularly fertile ground for joint presidential and congressional earmarks that often exceed the president's original earmark request.

For example, the dreaded Asian carp, a fish that has been eating its way up the Mississippi River, decimating native species, and now threatens to swim into Lake Michigan and begin feasting on fish there.

Bush proposed an earmark of $750,000 to help build an electrical barrier that would shock the carp back down the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal and keep them out of the lake.

By the time the Energy and Water bill was approved by the Senate, Bush was joined by four Democrats -- Majority Whip Dick Durbin and fellow Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, and Michigan Sens. Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow -- in a five-way earmark providing $3.25 million for the electric fish fence.

"If the president requests it, someone is saying, 'right on!' " Ellis said.

]]>

Bush: Congress should pass one-year continuing resolution if budget talks fail

Christian Bourge and Keith Koffler — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:00:00 -0500

President Bush Friday signed a new one-week continuing resolution, but called on Congress to approve a yearlong CR if it fails to finish the fiscal 2008 appropriations bills this year.

"It would be disappointing if members of Congress did not finish their work by the holidays," Bush told reporters. "But if they don't, they should not carry the unfinished business of 2007 into the new year," he said. "Instead they should pass a one-year continuing resolution that does not include wasteful spending or higher taxes." Bush said any spending package approved this year should be "clean" legislation "without gimmicks, without policy riders that could not be enacted in the ordinary legislative process." He acknowledged he will not get all the Iraq spending he has requested, saying, "I also understand that Congress may provide a down payment on the war funding I requested -- without artificial timelines for withdrawal."

With Republicans waiting to see what is in the emerging budget package, House Republican leaders have remained mum about what they will accept and have yet to decide exactly how they will proceed next week. But sources in the GOP leadership and Republican rank-and-file said a good portion of the Conference wants to fight any bill they believe steps over the line on "gimmickry" or spending.

"We've been clear all along that we have twin concerns of both the overall number and what's in the package," said a spokesman for Minority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo. "That seems to be exactly the message the president sent today."

GOP sources acknowledged that while many want to fight, some lawmakers just want to go home. In addition, Republican Conference sources noted voters are likely to only be tuning into the appropriations process at the end. As Democrats have agreed to come down most of the way from roughly $22 billion above Bush's budget, there is the chance any continued fight could make it look like Republicans are holding up the process over an extra $3.7 billion solely for veterans' programs, which enjoy support in both chambers, and $7.4 billion in energy spending for popular issues.

If this latest Democratic omnibus proposal does move forward with war funding intact, Democrats are also facing the potential of only getting it through the House with the help of Republicans, even without the backing of a good number of conservative Republicans who object to the idea of an omnibus.

"Conservatives and even a lot of moderates will not be voting for any omnibus, even one with adequate war funding and a top line of $933 billion (which most conservatives thought was too high to begin with)," said one GOP aide. Nevertheless, such a scenario would be a clear win in the minds of GOP leaders.

"Republicans would have enacted into law a lot more of our priorities than Democrats have accomplished their goals," said a spokesman for Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

]]>

House Dems accuse White House of censoring federal scientists

Darren Goode and Keith Koffler — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 00:00:00 -0500

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Democrats issued a draft report Monday accusing the White House of censoring federal scientists, editing reports and otherwise politicizing global warming talks. The committee Wednesday will vote on the report, which is being released during the final week of U.N. climate change talks in Bali, Indonesia.

It summarizes 16 months of committee investigation, including two hearings, 27,000 pages of documents from the White House Council on Environmental Quality and the Commerce Department, depositions and interviews, according to the draft report circulated by Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif.

"The evidence before the Committee leads to one inescapable conclusion: the Bush Administration has engaged in a systematic effort to manipulate climate change science and mislead policymakers and the public about the dangers of global warming," the draft report states.

The White House dismissed the panel's conclusions. "It's rehashed rhetoric that has come out of the Democrats beforehand and it is rejected as being untrue," White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said. Asked if the White House had ever asked agency employees to suppress climate change information, Perino said, "Not that I'm aware -- I don't believe that is true." Perino sought to showcase Bush's efforts on global warming, including a Sept. 30 meeting on the issue with leaders of economic powers and U.S. participation in discussions in Bali.

The report said the White House exerted unusual control over the public statements of federal scientists on climate change issues. It heavily edited congressional testimony from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Julie Gerberding and other federal scientists on human activity's impact on climate change, the report states.

There were at least 294 edits to the administration's Strategic Plan of the Climate Change Science Program "to exaggerate or emphasize scientific uncertainties or to deemphasize or diminish the importance of the human role in global warming," the report states. White House edits of EPA's draft Report on the Environment also were "extreme" and included "a reference to a discredited, industry-funded paper."

In a preview of Wednesday's partisan fight, committee Republicans said the draft is flawed and blamed Democrats for politicizing the issue. "An investigation that began as a bipartisan inquiry into the role of the Council on Environmental Quality in climate change policy has veered into a partisan diatribe against the Bush Administration," according to a response from Oversight and Government Reform ranking member Tom Davis, R-Va.

"The Majority has relied on selective passages from two hearings, one deposition, and one transcribed interview to make grossly exaggerated claims of political interference with climate change science." Republican say there is no evidence of political interference with science.

The report is instead "directed at the role of policymakers in -- guess what -- making and expressing Administration policy," the Republican response said.

]]>

Bush demands vote on Defense funding

Keith Koffler — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 00:00:00 -0500

President Bush Monday demanded that Congress pass an Iraq war funding bill that he can support, saying Congress should remain in session until the legislation is finished.

Bush put the Iraq funding supplemental at the top of what he described as "nearly a year's worth of unfinished business" that Congress must address this month. Bush opposes legislation backed by Democratic leaders that would offer a schedule for withdrawals of U.S. troops. Pointing to military progress on the ground, Bush said that this month "more of our troops will return home as a result of the success we're seeing in Iraq."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., accused Bush of failing to negotiate with Democrats. "We could have already given our troops what they need in Iraq and funded our critical needs at home if not for the stubborn refusal of President Bush and his Republican enablers to work with us," Reid said in a statement. "President Bush fails to grasp that the way to get things done for the American people is by sitting down to negotiate our differences, not by posturing from the Rose Garden."

Later, in a news conference, Reid repeated that the blame for little getting done this year belonged with the president.

"We've been willing to work with him, and he has for seven years been unalterably opposed to anything other than something he wants," Reid said. "No negotiations, no change of course, no cooperation whatsoever."

Bush listed steps the Pentagon will have to take if the supplemental is not soon passed, including sending layoff notices to about 100,000 civilian employees.

"Unless Congress acts," Bush said, the Army will run out of operations and maintenance money in February and the Marine Corps will deplete those funds in March. Reid Monday said he expects to hold another vote on Iraq war funding this month.

During a news conference this afternoon, Reid would not give details on any bill language he is considering, but said it could be "something a little bit different" from a $50 billion bridge fund that failed to pass the Senate last month. Reid also expressed some optimism that he has been building support in the Senate, saying that there have been "some changes on both sides."

In November, Senate Democrats fell seven votes short of the 60 needed to end debate and proceed to a vote on the bridge fund, which would tie the money to a withdrawal timeline and other conditions.

Monday, Reid said that bill had only "minimum strings attached." The $50 billion bridge fund, which passed the House on a 218-203 vote, is a down payment on Bush's request for $196.4 billion in emergency war-related and diplomatic spending this year.

Bush called on Congress to pass legislation updating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He demanded Democrats withdraw objections to language that would provide legal immunity to telecommunications companies that participated in the administration's eavesdropping program. He said Congress must also approve a patch to check the reach of the alternative minimum tax and approve the outstanding appropriations bills.

Bush repeated his threat to veto bills that exceeded his spending limits. He also warned Congress not to resort to an omnibus bill, which he called "one monster piece of legislation, which [Democrats] will load up with billions of dollars in earmarks and wasteful spending."

]]>

Bush vetoes Labor-HHS bill, blasts Democrats over spending

Keith Koffler — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:00:00 -0500

President Bush Tuesday vetoed the $151 billion Labor-HHS appropriations bill, launching what is sure to be a contentious and possibly lengthy appropriations standoff with Congress. The president rejected the measure at the White House before departing for New Albany, Ind., where he slammed Democrats for what he described as their eagerness to tax and spend.

In a speech brimming with fiery rhetoric and no sign of compromise, the president framed his rejection of the legislation as a stand against tax increases that will be needed to fund spending.

"I hope the leaders of Congress will cooperate and send me reasonable spending bills that I can sign," Bush said. "But if they insist on trying to raise taxes on the American people, I will not hesitate to use my veto pen to stop them."

After allowing that Democrats are "good people," the president charged them with trusting "the judgment of the federal government" over the "judgment of people" and said they were spending "like a teenager with a new credit card." He specifically rejected Congress' attempt to raise the tobacco tax to pay for increases in the State Children's Health Insurance Program, saying raising taxes was "habit forming" and would soon be applied to other areas.

"If you find a bill that doesn't have a tax increase, just wait awhile; they'll put one in there," he said. Bush did sign the Defense appropriations bill, even though he said that it, too, contained unnecessary spending. That measure also included a continuing resolution funding the government until Dec. 14.

The White House and Democrats are $22 billion apart on overall discretionary spending. Bush said the legislation he vetoed today is nearly $10 billion too high. Democrats stuck to their message that Bush is willing to spend huge sums on military operations while limiting funding for domestic programs.

"The President again vetoed a bipartisan and fiscally responsible bill that addresses the priorities of the American people," House Speaker Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a statement. "At the same time, President Bush and his congressional allies demand hundreds of billions of dollars for the war in Iraq -- none of it paid for."

Nevertheless, Pelosi struck a conciliatory tone. "We believe our differences are not so great that compromise cannot be reached," she said. House Appropriations Chairman Obey, D-Wis., called Bush's veto "pure politics." Bush also blasted Democrats for failing to approve a temporary alternative minimum tax fix, saying Congress should eliminate tax increases in legislation currently moving. He warned that if an AMT patch is not approved by Thanksgiving, refunds could be delayed next year.

Bush also repeated that Congress should not go home for Christmas until it approves a supplemental spending bill for the war in Iraq.

]]>

Bush nominates former North Dakota governor as Agriculture secretary

Jerry Hagstrom and Keith Koffler — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:00 -0400

"Ed Schafer's the right choice to fill this post," Bush said during an appearance with Schafer at the White House. "He was a leader on agricultural issues during his eight years as governor of North Dakota," Bush added, saying Schafer had worked to expand trade between the state and China, to spur North Dakota's biofuels industry and to increase economic opportunities in rural areas.

Schafer was elected governor in 1992, serving two four-year terms and becoming the first Republican to be re-elected governor in that state. In 2002, he helped found Extend America, a wireless communications company based in North Dakota. Schafer will succeed Mike Johanns, who resigned in September to run for the seat of retiring GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel in Nebraska.

Bush told the Grocery Manufacturers Association today the Senate should confirm Schafer quickly, but it is unlikely his nomination would be considered before next week's floor debate on the farm bill. Chuck Conner, the former USDA deputy secretary, has been serving as acting Agriculture secretary and negotiating the administration's position on the farm bill.

Republicans unsuccessfully tried to recruit Schafer to run against North Dakota's Democratic senators. Schafer's governorship was not marked by a high level of activism on agricultural issues, but he comes from one of the most agriculturally oriented states in the country.

Bush said Schafer's priorities as Agriculture secretary would be to work with Congress to pass a farm bill, help to conclude the Doha world trade round, and seek to open up new markets for U.S. beef. As governor, he led an agricultural trade mission from North Dakota to China in 2000 to open markets for North Dakota farm products and oversaw initial development of North Dakota's biofuel industries.

Schafer is the grandson of Danish immigrants who farmed; he grew up in Bismarck in the business world. Before entering politics, he was president of Gold Seal Co., a household products company founded by his father. Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., who is divorced from Schafer's sister, said in a statement: "I just congratulated Gov. Schafer and said I welcomed his nomination as a fellow North Dakotan. I hope he will support this farm bill, which is good for our state and the nation."

]]>

Bush says he will veto 'three-bill pileup'

Christian Bourge and Keith Koffler — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 00:00:00 -0400

Bush, who spoke following a White House meeting with House Republicans, derided as a "cynical political strategy" a move being considered to combine the Defense and Military Construction-Veterans Affairs spending bills with a Labor-Health and Human Services measure that Bush says is overpriced.

"I will veto such a three-bill pileup," Bush declared while flanked by House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Minority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo. A decision to combine the bills has not been made, although Democratic leaders are leaning in that direction.

This is the second week in a row the president has bashed Congress and he repeated his demand that Congress pass a "clean" Military Construction-VA Appropriations bill by Veterans Day.

Bush pointed to tax increases included in several measures, charging Democrats "haven't seen a bill they could not solve without shoving a tax hike into it." Proposed spending, he added, "is skyrocketing under their leadership." He noted that Congress has not completed any fiscal 2008 appropriations bills and he charged that Democrats have wasted valuable time on "a constant stream of investigations" and futile votes to end the war.

In a statement, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Congress had raised the minimum wage, overhauled ethics rules and implemented the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. She also asserted that congressional investigations had uncovered "billions of dollars in waste, fraud, and abuse in Iraq."

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., argued that the Democrats' agenda has been obstructed by Republicans and Bush, and he asserted that former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would still be serving if not for Democratic oversight. And he sought to highlight what Democrats view as Bush's deficit spending tendencies.

"He doesn't want anyone to pay for [federal spending] now," said Hoyer. "He wants to pay for it later."

Republicans emerged from the White House meeting reassured that Bush would not abandon them after the dust settles from the legislative shootouts to come. Some GOP lawmakers were angered by the ouster of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld after the November 2006 elections, since it followed a White House push for their support of him.

"The most valuable thing to come out of this is for members to hear from the horse's mouth that they are not going to get the rug pulled out from under them on vetoes," said one senior Republican leadership aide.

Peter Cohn contributed to this report.

]]>

Administration says deficit at lowest level in five years

Keith Koffler — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 00:00:00 -0400

At an estimated 1.2 percent of gross domestic product, according to the administration, the deficit is half the 40-year average deficit of 2.4 percent of GDP. President Bush used the news to call on Congress to exercise fiscal restraint and not raise taxes.

"Now the fundamental question is whether the United States Congress will work constructively with the administration to keep taxes low and to keep spending sound," Bush said after meeting with his economic advisers. "I look forward to working with members of both parties to continue keeping our fiscal house in order and to continue to head for a balanced budget."

In an interview after the announcement, Office of Management and Budget Director Jim Nussle said lower-than-expected revenue growth last year reflected some softening of the economy but only "on the margins ... It means you cannot take economic growth for granted. We're not going to grow out of this. We need to control spending."

Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., said Bush was trying to recast himself as a fiscal conservative and he called the bid "too little, too late" to make up for past spending.

"He will go down in history as the most fiscally irresponsible President ever," Conrad said in a statement. "The fact is that the nation's debt has exploded under his watch -- rising by $3 trillion since 2001, to $9 trillion today. And this debt buildup is occurring at the worst possible time, on the brink of the retirement of the baby boom generation."

White House Press Secretary Dana Perino attributed the buildup of debt under Bush to national security needs that had to be paid for in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. "There was extra spending on that, and we don't apologize for it," she said.

The administration's most recent fiscal 2007 forecast, included in the July Mid-Session Review, had projected a deficit of $205 billion. At the beginning of the year, as part of Bush's fiscal 2008 budget proposal, the administration had forecast that the fiscal 2007 budget deficit would total $244 billion.

]]>

Panel to set hearing date for attorney general nominee

Keith Koffler — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 00:00:00 -0400

"I look forward to scheduling and chairing the confirmation hearing on your nomination to serve as the Attorney General of the United States," Leahy wrote in a letter sent Tuesday to Mukasey. No date has been set, but a hearing cannot occur before an Oct. 16 meeting Leahy requested with Mukasey, according to a committee aide.

The letter suggests Leahy has abandoned efforts to obtain information from the White House before allowing a hearing and that he wants assurances instead from Mukasey on several matters related to the panel's probe into the firing last year of eight U.S. attorneys.

"I had hoped that the White House would have taken advantage of the time since the resignations of Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Rove to work with us to fulfill longstanding requests for information so that we could all agree about what went so wrong at the Department of Justice and work together to restore it," Leahy wrote, referring to former Attorney General Gonzales and White House adviser Karl Rove. "Instead, they have left you to answer the unanswered questions and left longstanding disputes unresolved."

During what will be his second session with Mukasey, Leahy wrote that he will seek assurances from him that he will safeguard the department from political pressure, prevent its interference in elections, take steps to restore morale and "uphold constitutional checks on executive power."

Leahy asked Mukasey if he would resist potential White House pressure not to bring to a grand jury contempt charges passed by the House or Senate. Leahy asked for his views on executive privilege, which has been asserted by the White House in the U.S. attorneys probe. Leahy also asked Mukasey to recuse himself from matters involving former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, a close associate of Mukasey, and to not "improperly use your position" should Giuliani become the GOP presidential nominee.

Leahy also wants to know whom Mukasey intends to appoint to senior positions "to help turn the department around."

The White House on Wednesday sought to raise the pressure on Leahy to move forward, demanding a hearing as soon as possible. "Members of the committee have been outspoken about the vacancies at DOJ, and they have an opportunity to do something about it by confirming him swiftly," said White House Press Secretary Dana Perino.

Perino said the committee has received "all of judge Mukasey's documents in preparation for a confirmation hearing" and that he has met or spoken with every member of the panel. But the panel only Tuesday received Mukasey's responses to a questionnaire sent to Mukasey just after his nomination, and Leahy and his staff must review the answers, a committee aide said.

]]>

Talks under way on hearing for attorney general nominee

Keith Koffler — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 00:00:00 -0400

That is happening despite indications that the nomination might get tangled in a dispute over documents long sought from the White House by Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. While it is not certain that Leahy's concerns will be addressed and that he will schedule a hearing, there appears to be a growing expectation that the nomination will be considered -- perhaps expeditiously.

One source with knowledge of the process said he expected a hearing in mid-October. The committee formally received the nomination Friday and sent Mukasey a standard questionnaire for nominees Monday.

Leahy has described his talks with the White House as productive, but has said little else since issuing a statement shortly after the nomination was announced. At the time, Leahy said the provision of "information and documents" previously sought from the White House might abet the nomination process.

"Cooperation from the Administration in making progress on our longstanding oversight requests is still needed and will be helpful in moving forward" with the nomination, Leahy wrote.

While declining to comment on what documents are being discussed, sources noted that it should not necessarily be assumed that White House communications related to the firings of U.S. attorneys last year -- the focus of a months-long standoff between Leahy and the White House -- are central to Leahy's demands.

White House Counsel Fred Fielding met with Leahy on Capitol Hill last week to discuss documents Leahy is seeking, and the two also have spoken by phone, according to one White House official.

"They have had some conversations and may have more," the official said. He emphasized that all discussions with Leahy about documents covering other issues are unrelated to the Mukasey nomination.

The White House continues to work carefully with Mukasey on the questionnaire and is expected to finish it soon, possibly by the end of the week. But, in what appears to be raising some eyebrows, the White House also has yet to forward to the committee the results of Mukasey's FBI background check, according to another source.

The administration is foregoing outside help in prepping and assisting Mukasey. Such assistance was provided for President Bush's Supreme Court nominees. Heading up the effort are Harold Kim from the White House legislative affairs office -- who previously served as a Senate Judiciary Committee aide -- and Bill Burck from the White House Counsel's office.

]]>

Bush, Dems spar as vote on stopgap spending bill nears

Keith Koffler — Mon, 24 Sep 2007 00:00:00 -0400

"The principle should be that there'd be no new spending -- no new policies, no new projects -- unless the president and Congress agree in advance on a specific item," Bush said at the White House.

The House is scheduled to take up a short-term continuing resolution Wednesday that would fund government programs until mid-November, when Congress is set to leave for the year. At some point before adjourning, lawmakers would have to either approve the remaining individual appropriations bills or send Bush an omnibus bill covering all spending.

Bush said he favored Congress taking up each bill separately. "If they think that by waiting until just before they leave for the year to send me a bill that is way over budget and thicker than a phone book, [if] they think that's going to force me to sign it, it's not," Bush said.

For the first time in the budget debate, Bush publicly used the term "government shutdown," but only to say that the one that occurred in 1995 was disruptive and to note that no Congress has allowed it to happen since. White House Press Secretary Dana Perino also used the term but added, "We don't want to see that happen ... I don't think Congress wants to see that happen."

Bush repeated his criticism of Congress for devising a budget plan that is about $22 billion costlier than the one he requested, saying the difference "is larger than the annual revenues of most Fortune 500 companies."

House Appropriations Chairman David Obey, D-Wis., said Bush's remarks might be harming the prospects of coming to an agreement on the budget by seeking to "manufacture" a disagreement over the continuing resolution.

"President Bush's statement a few minutes ago telling the Congress to pass a clean continuing resolution is the equivalent of the rooster claiming credit for the sunrise," Obey said. "The fact is that I met with the president's budget director last week and informed him at that time that we intended to pass a clean CR. I asked him if he would let me know if the administration had any exceptions that they wanted included and they sent us over a dozen changes that they wanted."

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., accused Bush of "itching to veto appropriations bills for the 2008 fiscal year to re-establish his bona-fides with conservative groups." Many conservatives have been critical of the president for what they see as his excessive spending.

Christian Bourge contributed to this report.

]]>

Acting USDA chief sees 'seamless transition'

Jerry Hagstrom and Keith Koffler — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 00:00:00 -0400

"He really gave me the opportunity to be directly involved in every decision," Conner told reporters shortly after President Bush accepted Johanns' resignation and put Conner in charge of USDA, at least temporarily.

Johanns, a former Republican governor of Nebraska, is moving back to the state and is expected to run for the Senate. The transition comes at a crucial time at USDA, as Congress works on the 2007 farm bill.

"As deputy secretary [Conner] has already been immersed in the farm bill debate and will not miss a beat in terms of contact with members of Congress," one White House official said.

Conner noted that he chaired some of the farm bill forums USDA held last year around the country, helped write the administration's farm bill policy book and represented the administration in House Agriculture Committee markup sessions. He also was the administration's point man on the 2002 farm bill, while serving as an agriculture specialist on the White House National Economic Council.

Conner said he had not discussed with White House officials whether he would be nominated for the permanent post. Bush aides did not comment Thursday on Conner's long-term prospects.

The former aide to Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and one-time Senate Agriculture Committee staff director is highly regarded on Capitol Hill for his technical expertise and ability to forge compromises. But some lobbyists and Senate aides have said Southern senators might have reservations about confirming him because he so strongly articulated the administration's plans to change the cotton program and to impose strict limits on subsidies to individual farmers.

Senate Agriculture ranking member Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said in a statement Thursday he was grateful for Johanns' "dedication and hard work," but he did not mention Conner.

Senate Agriculture Chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said Conner was "a good choice ... I have known him for over 20 years and believe his involvement in this farm bill process will make for a smooth transition."

House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., added, "Chuck Conner has been running the show behind the scenes on the USDA farm bill agenda, so not much will change now that he's been named acting secretary."

Johanns did not announce his Senate candidacy when he appeared with Bush in the White House Rose Garden, but Bush all but did it for him, saying Johanns would be "an outstanding member of the United States Senate." Bush added that he "couldn't have asked for a better secretary of agriculture."

Johanns will run for the seat held by Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel, who is retiring at the end of his term. But even after Bush spilled the beans at the White House, Johanns remained coy about his political plans.

In an outdoor farewell gathering of USDA employees this afternoon, he said he wanted to spend more time in his home state. To reporters covering that event, he said, "I'm going to go back to Nebraska as quick as I can, and then we'll kind of take it from there."

]]>

Administration plays down report on Iraq benchmarks

Keith Koffler — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:00:00 -0400

The ratings are nearly the same as in an initial assessment released in July. Of the 18 benchmarks, Iraq has made satisfactory progress on nine and unsatisfactory progress on seven; two were not rated because the "necessary preconditions" for doing so have not been reached.

One benchmark -- whether the government has made satisfactory progress on de-Baathification reform legislation, was upgraded since July from unsatisfactory to satisfactory even though that legislation was not passed. Iraqi factions have reached agreement on draft de-Baathification legislation, and more than 45,000 former Baathist soldiers have been granted pensions or restored to active duty, the report notes.

The report lists what it describes as evidence that some benchmarks represent "lagging indicators" of real progress.

While Iraq received a failing grade for progress on an oil revenue sharing law, "significant oil revenues are being distributed by the central government to the provinces in an equitable manner," the report states. And while there has not been satisfactory progress toward a provincial powers law, "the provincial governors and councils are making decisions on budget expenditures through engagement with the central government . . . and are providing essential services for their constituents."

Many of the benchmarks describing military objectives are being achieved satisfactorily, according to the report. It also advocates patience with Iraq on political reconciliation. "Reconciliation in a society marked by nearly four decades of dictatorship will not be linear and will take time, patience, and support from the international community," the report states.

The report leaves congressional Democrats in a tough position. With few viable options beyond what has already been attempted, the Senate is expected to vote again next week on an amendment from Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., requiring active-duty troops to spend as much time at home as time deployed.

House Democrats have yet to decide a course of action. Democratic leadership aides said that House efforts will, at least in part, continue to take advantage of the less than ideal political situation for Republicans.

"I find it hard to believe that next spring, six months out from an election when there has been no change and we will have 150,000 troops there, that they [Republicans] are not going to be feeling a lot of heat," said a senior Democratic leadership aide. "We will continue to put votes on the floor to show Republican constituents where they are standing, which is with Bush and staying the course, and we have to make decisions about how to deal with the [war] funding."

Christian Bourge contributed to this report.

]]>

Administration, panel eye compromise in Tillman case

Keith Koffler — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 00:00:00 -0400

In a letter Friday to House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and ranking member Tom Davis, R-Va., the White House agreed to allow untranscribed interviews with former presidential counselor Dan Bartlett, former press secretary Scott McClellan and chief speechwriter Michael Gerson.

What sets this agreement apart from similar agreements that the committee rejected in connection with an investigation of the firings of eight U.S. attorneys late last year is that the agreement does not preclude Waxman and Davis from issuing subpoenas to question the former aides at a later date.

According to the letter, which was reviewed by CongressDaily, the committee reserves the right to seek further testimony, while President Bush reserves his right to prevent such testimony by invoking executive privilege. In addition, the White House has agreed to allow the committee to conduct transcribed interviews with two lower-ranking former officials, John Currin and Taylor Gross.

Waxman's panel is seeking to determine when the White House and senior Defense Department officials learned the circumstances of Tillman's death and whether they withheld the information from the public. The military had initially claimed Tillman was killed by enemy fire.

In the U.S. attorneys case, Bush invoked executive privilege to bar former and current White House aides from testifying. In a letter Tuesday, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked Bush for a meeting to discuss the impasse. The letter accused the White House of "stonewalling" and said Leahy was considering contempt of Congress citations for White House officials who have refused to testify.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto on Wednesday dismissed the letter as a publicity stunt, calling it "replete with invective" and criticizing Leahy's decision to release the letter "rather than contacting the White House in a quiet way."

In July, the House Judiciary Committee approved contempt citations against White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers for ignoring subpoenas from the panel.

]]>

Top political strategist to leave Bush administration

Keith Koffler — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 00:00:00 -0400

He will leave the White House at the end of August. Before flying together to Texas, where Bush will begin a vacation at his ranch in Crawford, the two men spoke briefly to reporters at the White House. Rove praised Bush's leadership in fighting the war on terror and handling the economy.

"Your integrity, character and decency have remained unchanged and inspiring," Rove said.

Rove, 56, will leave Washington to live in Texas, where he and Bush grew a friendship into a political alliance that brought Bush the governorship and the presidency. Rove gave little reason for his departure other than a desire to spend more time with his wife and his son, who attends college in San Antonio.

While it is unclear who will replace Rove, it is likely -- since Rove has been talking with Bush about leaving for at least a year -- that the White House has a plan in place. Rove's departure, along with that of White House Counsel Dan Bartlett earlier this summer, means Bush will enter the homestretch of his presidency without his two closest White House advisers.

Rove serves nominally as deputy chief of staff, but the modest title belies his wide-ranging influence within the White House, where he has been political strategist, domestic policy guru and emissary to Capitol Hill and Republicans throughout the country. Rove's very omnipresence helped draw scrutiny from congressional Democrats, who are probing his actions on a variety of fronts.

Senate and House Judiciary Committee Democrats are looking into whether Rove brought political influence to bear in last year's controversial firings of eight U.S. attorneys. A subpoena from the Senate panel for his testimony was rejected recently after Bush cited executive privilege in refusing to allow Rove to appear.

In a statement Monday, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said Rove is departing under a cloud and that the investigation would continue.

"Mr. Rove's apparent attempts to manipulate elections and push out prosecutors citing bogus claims of voter fraud shows corruption of federal law enforcement for partisan political purposes, and the Senate Judiciary Committee will continue its investigation into this serious issue," Leahy said.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is scrutinizing Rove's actions in several matters, including the use of Republican National Committee e-mail accounts by White House staffers, the disclosure of CIA operative Valerie Plame's name to columnist Robert Novak and political presentations made to agency staffers by White House officials. An aide to Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., on Monday said Rove's departure from the White House would not affect its investigations.

]]>

Bush team, Dem Hill leaders still eager to work together

Keith Koffler — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 00:00:00 -0400

The surprising spirit of cooperation does not preclude acrimonious conflict ahead over issues like the budget and Iraq. But it does mean that both sides, recognizing that presidential politics will increasingly intrude on their ability to get anything done next year, continue to view each other as vital for achieving things Democrats can take to voters and President Bush can use to buff his legacy.

Sources portray a clinical detachment by top officials on both sides over divisive matters like the reauthorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the performance of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, whom the White House said Democrats were trying to destroy.

One White House official compared the relationship with Democrats to Wall Street, where emotion eventually subsides and decisions are made on economic fundamentals. "There's nothing unusual about conflict" in Washington, the official said. Progress "won't be based on how Congress and the White House are getting along; it will be based on the substance of the legislation."

Brendan Daly, a spokesman for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., agreed: "At the end of the day, it will come down to issues, not personalities."

Sources outlined examples of below-the-radar cooperation. One senior administration official pointed appreciatively to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's willingness to take up the nomination of former Rep. Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, to be Office of Management and Budget director first thing in September.

A House Democratic aide noted the removal of labor provisions objectionable to the White House from legislation implementing recommendations of the 9/11 commission and agreement on legislation promoting scientific research and science and math education.

According to a senior Senate Democratic aide, the White House is consulting more on Iraq and other issues. Reid is able to quickly get White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten and others on the phone when he wants. "Candi's fantastic," the source said about White House legislative affairs chief Candida Wolff.

Moreover, Bush, Reid, and Pelosi, all veteran politicians who have clawed their way to the summit of power, have unexpectedly good personal chemistry, aides say. Semi-regular meetings at the White House tend to be very cordial.

"Sen. Reid likes the president as a person, but there are some serious disagreements with him on policy," said Reid spokesman Jim Manley. Each understands it is their business to say tough things about the other but not take it personally -- even the prickly president.

A week ago Tuesday, as the session was winding down amid fierce skirmishing on several fronts, Bush, Pelosi and their spouses sat down to a quiet dinner at the White House.

]]>

Senate leader says there are no guarantees for OMB nominee

Keith Koffler — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 00:00:00 -0400

"We were very clear with the president. There's not a guarantee that we'll get him confirmed," Reid said after a meeting Wednesday between President Bush and the bipartisan congressional leadership.

The Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs panel approved Nussle Wednesday afternoon by a vote of 9-0, with one member voting "present." But a senior Democratic Senate aide said that while the Budget Committee will consider the nomination Thursday, it is unlikely to be brought to the floor before Congress begins its August recess.

With OMB chief Rob Portman's last day in office scheduled for Friday, Congress appears set to return for the fall budget battle to deal with an administration without a confirmed OMB director. A senior White House official Wednesday said he was not aware of any discussion about a possible recess appointment for Nussle. While the official did not rule out such a move, he said Bush wants Congress to do the job of confirming Nussle.

According to participants in the meeting, Bush refused to move off his demand for a discretionary domestic spending limit of $933 billion. Democrats want to spend about $22 billion more.

A source privy to the discussions said Democratic leaders held out the prospect of a deal if the number was closer to their top line than his. "Democrats argued for the president to meet them somewhere north of the middle on their spending figure," said the source. "Bush said no. He held firm to his numbers."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., afterward threatened to meet Bush's demand by slashing his proposals. "At the end of the day, if we honor the president's number, we may not be able to accommodate his priorities, and then he may have a different thought about it," she told reporters.

Reid argued that "a number of things have come up" since Bush proposed his budget, including border security spending needs and the recommendation of the Dole-Shalala commission on veterans' health care, which he said would cost about $1 billion to implement.

All sides agreed that it would be best for each appropriations bill to be considered separately. "We're better off doing one bill at a time and negotiating on those bills rather than having this umbrella threat of vetoing everything," Reid said.

But, while the White House and Republicans are willing to talk individual bills, Bush continues to threaten to veto individual bills if they point toward a breach of his spending limit. Democrats emphasized that the funding difference as a percentage of the budget was small.

"We don't want to get into a big bog at the end of this session," said Reid. "It's clear that as we get into the fall, we're going to have a big problem," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. Pelosi said the House intended to complete both the Agriculture and Defense appropriations bills this week.

]]>

White House says Dems are trying to 'destroy' Gonzales

Keith Koffler — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:00:00 -0400

"I think that when the committee relentlessly asked questions about a subject that they know that he is going to have difficulty answering because he has one hand tied behind his back, that they . . . have deliberately had this crusade against him to try to destroy the Attorney General," said White House Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino. "What I'm saying is that for months we've had this trickle-down effect of, let's issue a subpoena, and then hold him in contempt, and then we'll call for a special prosecutor. ... It's a constant setting of settling scores."

Gonzales incurred withering criticism during testimony Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Lawmakers questioned his assertion that a meeting with congressional leaders in 2004 did not concern the terrorist surveillance program, but another classified program that he was not at liberty to discuss.

Perino indicated Gonzales was put in an impossible situation because he could not answer questions about a classified program. Some Democrats want the Justice Department to appoint a special prosecutor to determine whether Gonzales committed perjury before the committee.

Gonzales' credibility was questioned anew Thursday when FBI Director Mueller said there was extensive debate within the administration about the eavesdropping program and contended that the program was the topic of discussion during a visit by then-White House Counsel Gonzales and then-Chief of Staff Andrew Card to the bedside of ailing Attorney General John Ashcroft.

Gonzales has said another classified program was the focus of the hospital-room session and said there was not significant debate within the administration about the legality of the eavesdropping program.

Perino said Mueller's and Gonzales' testimony was true, but she said she was not permitted to say why it was true because of the classified nature of the information. She suggested that a closed session with senators might help explain the apparent discrepancies in the testimony.

]]>

Lawmaker to push contempt vote for White House officials

Keith Koffler — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 00:00:00 -0400

"I've allowed the White House and Ms. Miers every opportunity to cooperate with this investigation, either voluntarily or under subpoena," Conyers said in a statement. "It is still my hope that they will reconsider this hard-line position, and cooperate with our investigation so that we can get to the bottom of this matter."

President Bush recently decided that Miers' potential testimony was covered by executive privilege and directed her not to testify. Miers subsequently declined to appear for a July 12 hearing. Bush has applied executive privilege to White House documents sought by the panel, and Bolten has refused to turn them over.

The White House has offered Democrats a deal, rejected so far, to provide certain documents and to allow White House officials to speak with lawmakers as long as the aides are not under oath and transcripts are not made.

Responding to Conyers' move Monday, Press Secretary Tony Snow said the faceoff between the administration and Congress was unnecessary and offered the deal again. "We continue to offer a way of accommodation for the House and the Senate," he said.

He called on Democrats to focus on other business, such as appropriations. "It seems now that we have a fishing expedition that is woefully short on fish," Snow said. Snow said a contempt vote by Congress would be sent to the Justice Department, which would then "make a determination on the merits."

The administration contended last week that Congress cannot force the Justice Department to prosecute an official for contempt if the president has employed executive privilege to testimony or documents being sought.

]]>

White House says report on Iraq surge might not be definitive

Keith Koffler — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 00:00:00 -0400

"I'm not going to try to prejudge," Snow said. Snow did not repudiate a statement Thursday by Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the second-ranking commander in Iraq, who said it will take until November to do "a good assessment" of U.S. strategy in Iraq.

Snow did not specifically embrace the statement, and he denied that Bush is "moving the goalposts" on Congress, where many lawmakers view September as a key moment for the president to justify continuing the war. "This is not an attempt to buy more time," Snow said.

He also appeared to try to minimize the significance of Odierno's comments, saying the surge was showing significant results. Snow cited statistics to demonstrate progress, noting weapons that have been recovered by allied troops, enemy leaders who have been taken into custody, increased activity by Iraqi troops and reduced violence in Iraq's Al-Anbar province.

Snow said some of the benchmarks that will be used in the September report to evaluate progress since the troop "surge" began this spring may not be useful. Bush is not repudiating the benchmarks, according to Snow, but he wants lawmakers to consider other factors.

"You certainly will respond to your obligation to measure things in terms of those benchmarks, but there also may be other metrics that are going to be useful for members of Congress," Snow said, pointing in particular to the sentiments of the Iraqi people.

Appearing today in the Rose Garden, Bush criticized Congress for failing to pass the fiscal 2008 Defense appropriations bill, demanding that lawmakers finish the legislation and deliver "on budget and on time" before the fiscal year ends Oct. 1.

"I submitted to Congress a Defense Department spending bill for the upcoming final year that will provide funds to upgrade our equipment for our troops in Iraq and provides a pay raise for our military," Bush said. "Even members of Congress who no longer support our effort in Iraq should at least be able to provide an increase in pay for our troops fighting there."

]]>

Need for next war spending bill might be delayed

Keith Koffler — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 00:00:00 -0400

Gen. David Petraeus, the Iraq war commander, owes Congress a progress report on the war in September. The last supplemental, passed in June, provided funding through Sept. 30 and offered Democrats a handy forum for highlighting objections to the war and for proposing alternative strategies.

But Office of Management and Budget Director Rob Portman, briefing reporters at the White House, said more money might not be needed until December -- or even later -- and urged Congress instead to finish appropriations bills.

"Sept. 30th is fiscal year end. We need to have these bills done, we need to have some resolution," he said.

Portman said the Defense Department is trying to determine how much money it needs and when. "We don't know when it will be necessary to have another supplemental," he said.

One senior administration said that while "Democrats are trying to accelerate the war supplemental, we're trying to make sure they get their regular business done on time."

The official said money from the supplemental will remain after Sept. 30 because the administration received the measure later than expected from Congress.

The legislation was stalled for weeks as Congress and the White House faced off over provisions President Bush saw as limiting his ability to conduct the war on his own terms.

Portman also said the administration is not open to including border enforcement money that is not offset in the next supplemental request.

"It's not something at this point that we think is appropriate," he said. "We think what's appropriate is to get the appropriation bill done, which has a big increase in border security funding."

He noted that a congressional proposal for providing more than $4 billion in new funds for border enforcement was to be paid for by fees collected under immigration legislation that died on the Senate floor last month.

"Well, there won't be any fees now, unless by some miracle we have a revival of the immigration bill in the House and Senate," he said.

Portman said that in the upcoming appropriations debate, the White House would stand firm in its insistence that Congress limit non-security related domestic discretionary spending to $933 billion, but he pledged to be flexible about spending amounts within individual bills.

While noting that the $22 billion separating administration and congressional spending proposals was "a lot of money," he suggested that the differences were surmountable.

]]>

Bush issues Iraq report as Senate argues over strategy

Megan Scully, Ben Schneider, and Keith Koffler — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 00:00:00 -0400

His comments, accompanying the release of an interim report to Congress on progress in Iraq, spurred Democrats and Republicans to launch appeals for support for their competing positions on the war. Bush told a White House news conference he holds out some prospect of a troop drawdown, but said it must be linked to the success of U.S. operations on the ground.

"We're working to defeat al-Qaida and other extremists and aid the rise of an Iraqi government that can protect its people, deliver basic services and be an ally in the war against these extremists and radicals," Bush said. "By doing this, we'll create the conditions that would allow our troops to begin coming home while securing our long-term national interests in Iraq and in the region."

Although the interim progress report drew varying assessments on Iraq, citing satisfactory progress in only eight of 18 key areas, Bush indicated he will not make significant changes in strategy until a "more comprehensive assessment" is delivered in September.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., called Bush's report the latest proof that "the war in Iraq is headed in a dangerous direction," adding he was pleased that seven Republicans voted Wednesday for an amendment that would have set mandatory down time for troops between overseas deployments.

Republicans downplayed those defections, noting that the amendment failed, and predicted the defeat of upcoming Democratic-led amendments. They were joined by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., who said the report indicated a need for continued persistence from U.S. armed forces and that he believes "General Petreus and his troops have al-Qaida on the run."

Reid said he and other Democratic leaders were sending a letter to the president laying out what they believe the problems are and asking what Bush is doing to address such concerns.

As debate continued on the Senate's fiscal 2008 defense authorization bill, senators continued to seek allies for their war-related amendment. Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., a longtime opponent of the war, said he would back an amendment by Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., that would mandate the White House begin to withdraw troops from Iraq within 120 days and maintain only a "limited presence" in the country by next spring.

Feingold added he does not plan to push for a more stringent proposal that he and Reid have offered in the past that would cut off most funding for the war this spring. But Feingold warned he would introduce his amendment during debate on the fiscal 2008 Defense appropriations bill should Levin-Reed fail.

Despite mounting GOP defections on Iraq, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., backed the White House stance that lawmakers should wait until the release of a final progress report in September before acting on the war. "There is much at stake here and, frankly, they deserve to be heard," McConnell said.

]]>

President claims executive privilege in fight with Congress

Keith Koffler — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 00:00:00 -0400

In a letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., White House Counsel Fred Fielding also rejected requests for extra details about the executive privilege claim over the documents, saying explanations beyond those already given were not needed. Taylor and Miers have been subpoenaed to testify. Leahy released a letter Sunday from Taylor's attorney saying that, absent executive privilege, Taylor would have testified willingly.

In a statement Monday, Conyers pointed the way toward a showdown in the courts. "We are extremely disappointed with the White House letter," Conyers said. "Contrary to what the White House may believe, it is the Congress and the courts that will decide whether an invocation of executive privilege is valid, not the White House unilaterally."

Conyers sent Fielding a letter Monday asking him to waive executive privilege. Conyers also asked Bush to allow top aides to explain his decision to commute the prison sentence of I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, a former top aide to Vice President Cheney.

Leahy in a statement angrily accused the White House of "stonewalling." He questioned the validity of the White House claim that the action was needed to safeguard the president's right to private counsel from his aides, pointing to testimony by Justice officials indicating that President Bush himself was not involved in the decision-making process that led to the firings.

In his letter, Fielding rejected a demand by the chairmen to provide justifications for each document covered by executive privilege, saying reasons already given were sufficient and that the panels have indicated they would seek to enforce the subpoenas anyway.

"Given the descriptions of the materials in question that have already been provided, this demand is unreasonable because it represents a substantial incursion into presidential prerogatives and because, in view of the open-ended scope of the committee's inquiry, it would impose a burden of very significant proportions," Fielding wrote.

He renewed an offer, already rejected by Democrats, to provide certain documents and allow White House aides to speak with the committee if the conversations were not under oath and if no transcript were kept.

Conyers again rejected that offer. "While we remain willing to negotiate with the White House, they adhere to their unacceptable all-or-nothing position, and now will not even seek to properly justify their privilege claims," he said. Leahy also offered to "negotiate a workable solution to the committee's requests."

]]>