If President Bush vetoes the bill for the funds for Iraq, what kind of compromise might they reach?

Question

I don't think Congress is going to back down on this bill and I don't think Pres. Bush will sign it as it is. What might be something they could compromise on to keep the funding for the troops?

Answer 1

Obama has already stated that if the President vetos the bill (he will) that the House and Senate would work to pass a bill without the timeline provision. The House and Senate are over a barrel and put themselves in a bad position on this one. NO ONE wants to look like they are in a partisan bickering session while playing politics with money for troops while in harm's way.

Answer 2

They might agree on Sept 2008 date from the House, non-binding, but still there so everyone gives up something. Senate gives up the earlier date, House gives up a binding deadline, President gives up not having a deadline.

But some Democrats are acting "emboldened" to say if the President vetoes it, that's it. It's not their problem to see that the troops get money no matter what. They are acting like the public will think it's Bush's duty to order a withdrawal if he vetoes the funds, and he will get blamed if he doesn't. They have filibuster power to stop any bill that does not include a deadline, even if a few Dems have weak resolve to block funding.

At the White House, spokeswoman Dana Perino said she doesn't know what polling led Reid to change his mind about "standing with the troops."

Answer 3

Congress needs a 2/3 majority to over ride a presidential veto. Compromise and negotation aren't Bush's strong suit. The congress doesn't really want a time table, they want a schedule of events (times can fluxuate) for the Iraqi's to step up their efforts to police their own nation. This war has lasted longer than any war in history and the Iraqi's are playing us like a fiddle. They need to stop dragging their feet.

Answer 4

Well, bush has to work with Congress on this. Most of the people in this country is tired of this war, and the numbers are growing.

He may not care because he is a lame duck president, but he is hurting his party. This country sees a Democratic Congress trying to get the troops out, so you will have people lean towards the Democrats for president, if they are not leaning that way already...

Answer 5

it will be interesting..I think he has to sign it or (horrors) actually do a little compromising...I think the end result will be 1 1/2 more years, just before the next election, and it will be over. The Democrats won't accept a time period that could extend into the next congress in which they might not be in majority.

Answer 6

it's a foregone conclusion that bush will veto the bill, and the dems will pass a funding bill without the timeline provisions. the purpose of the bill is to document each republican congressman voting against the provision to withdraw by next year. it's ammunition for the 2008 elections. the dems will still achieve their goal of a 2008 withdrawal by not passing a funding bill next year.

Answer 7

Bush will vetoe anything that says deadline. He wants money to do whatever he wants. Stay in Iraq for 10, 20, 50 years or whatever. He's used to getting every toys he wants like wire tap w/o warrant, CIA renditions/Gitmo, and all other stuff.

Answer 8

Hopefully none. We have a war to win. Anyone who doesn't want to win is either selfish and uncaring towards the Iraqis, power-hungry and moronic, or just plain corrupt.

Answer 9

Hopefully congress will give up in disgrace & shame...