Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Alerts | Electronic edition | Advertise | Subscribe to the paper | Today's Extras
Subscribe

HomeNewsLocal News

Split on splitting from Iraq

State delegation staking ground on Dem pullout plan

Published March 9, 2007 at midnight

Text size  

WASHINGTON -- Colorado lawmakers are divided over a proposed new deadline for removing U.S. combat troops from Iraq, and that includes a possible split in the Democratic ranks.

So far, only one member of the state's congressional delegation — newly elected Rep. Ed Perlmutter, D-Golden — has publicly embraced a plan outlined by Democratic leaders Thursday to force the withdrawal of combat troops by the end of next year.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., outlined the proposal Thursday as part of an emergency war-spending bill. It would increase funds for wounded veterans and other needs, while attempting to enforce benchmarks for Iraq's government to take over security responsibilities.

The proposal drew an immediate veto threat from President Bush because it would impose a deadline to begin withdrawing combat troops by March 2008 — earlier if benchmarks aren't met.

Presidential counselor Dan -Bartlett called the bill a "non- starter" and "an artificial, precipitous withdrawal."

Democrats' stance

That criticism angered Perlmutter, who made opposition to the war in Iraq a central part of his election campaign.

"The president sort of got us -into this mess. He has conducted it poorly and managed it poorly," Perlmutter said. "For them to blast anybody after all their mistakes is pretty amazing to me."

Many Democrats have harshly criticized the handling of the war but not all embrace a timetable for withdrawal of troops.

Rep. Mark Udall, D-Eldorado Springs, who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, issued a statement praising parts of the plan, such as the need to hold the Iraqi government more accountable.

"The only concern I have with the language of the proposal is the specific timetable for withdrawing troops," Udall said. "I think it would be wiser if it were not part of the final bill that we will consider on the floor of the House of Representatives."

Democrats, who retook control of the House and Senate in January, are divided. Some are hesitant to tie the hands of military commanders, and others are pushing for even tougher measures to cut off war funding.

Rep. John Salazar, D-Manassa, has yet to decide on the House proposal, and his brother, Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Denver, hasn't taken a position on another Iraq proposal in the Senate.

Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Denver, who is chief deputy majority whip, did not take a formal position Thursday as she was charged with wrangling a consensus out of a divided caucus, spokesman Brandon MacGillis said.

GOP opposition

Colorado Republicans were united in opposition.

"Nancy Pelosi has as much business micromanaging the Iraq war as I do driving a tank," Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Fort Morgan, said in a written statement.

"I'm very concerned that they're trying to handcuff the commander in chief and the generals on the ground," said Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colorado Springs.

"The Democrats know that micro-managing military strategy is unconstitutional, but they are left engaging in this kind of political brinkmanship because they don't have the votes to do what they really want to do — cut off funding for the troops," Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Littleton, said in a written statement.

Anti-war push

Democrats are also under heavy pressure from anti-war activists. On Thursday, activists launched their latest round of sit-ins at the offices of Udall, DeGette and Sen. Salazar, pushing for them to stop war funding and bring troops home.

Protest organizer Rich Andrews accused Udall of refusing to take a harder line to end the war because he does not want to be called weak on defense in a possible run for the Senate in 2008.

That drew a terse response from Udall spokesman Lawrence Pacheco, who said the congressman voted against the original war powers resolution in 2002 and has been a consistent war critic.

"Frankly, these folks who have interrupted our daily operations of our office have a lot of gall to think that they have the proper moral upstanding," Pacheco said.

"They have insulted our staff members. They have behaved atrociously, and that behavior is going to get them nowhere."

Post your comment

Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.




(Forgotten your password?)




News Tip

Know about something we should be reporting? Tell us about it.


Reprints