"Webb measure on troop rotations stalls, in a new setback for Dems"

The Hill:

Senate Republicans blocked on Wednesday a troop readiness plan that once appeared the Democrats’ best chance to force the White House’s hand on the war in Iraq.

A proposal by Sen. Jim Webb (D) to give troops rest periods as long as their combat time failed to clear the 60-vote threshold needed for passage, marking another setback for the Democrats in their efforts to corral enough centrist Republicans to defy President Bush’s Iraq policy. Webb’s fellow Virginian, Sen. John Warner (R), pulled his support for the plan amid brief confusion over his intentions that sparked an apology from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R), who joined with Webb on the readiness amendment, helped Democrats court possible GOP supporters. But the prospects of snaring the three Republicans needed to overcome a filibuster darkened by midday, when undecided senators huddled with Pentagon officials and McCain announced that Warner would offer the minority’s alternative to the Webb plan.

“We’ll look forward to a rather unusual situation here in the Senate: a vote on a resolution by one senator from Virginia and a resolution from another senator from Virginia on the same issue,” McCain said on the floor.

Webb responded with evident shock, having told reporters less than an hour earlier that he hoped Warner would still support the readiness plan. While the GOP alternative would be a nonbinding endorsement of longer rest for troops, Webb said on the floor, “This is a situation that calls for the will of the Congress.”

McCain soon revised his remarks and apologized to Warner, his predecessor as senior Republican on the Armed Services Committee, for “misspeaking” in prematurely attaching his name to the GOP alternative. Warner followed by crediting Webb and emphasizing his friendship with the freshman, before walking back his July vote in favor of the amendment.

The GOP alternative to Webb’s plan was ultimately sponsored by McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), voicing support for longer rest for troops but making no mandate. McCain’s resolution also would require the Pentagon to certify that new force-rotation rules would not prolong deployment times.

Warner said military officials met with Warner, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and other centrists on Wednesday to avow that Webb’s plan would not be feasible until at least October 2008 “without causing severe problems within the existing forces.”

Yet Hagel and Webb, a former Navy secretary, told reporters that the Bush administration’s intense lobbying push against their amendment reflected political, not military, concerns.

“There is an attempt by this administration to paint a dark picture with respect to troop welfare in order to try to diminish what we are attempting to do on behalf of the troops,” Webb said.

The amendment to the defense authorization bill ultimately failed, 56-44. Taking into account Warner’s change and the presence of Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), the plan garnered the same number of votes as it did in July.

Meanwhile, Democratic leaders and centrists on both sides continued jockeying for position on broad proposals to narrow the mission in Iraq and force a start to troop draw-downs. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) decision to forgo attempts at compromise with Republicans won plaudits from liberal members such as Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.).

Dodd, a presidential hopeful, said he told his leaders bluntly that “you’d lose my vote” on any Iraq proposals without a binding date to pull out troops. “Clarity and firmness are more important to constituents than trying to get to [60] votes,” Dodd said.

But few candidates for consensus emerged from the crowded field of war plans currently in the works. Sen. Ken Salazar’s (D-Colo.) office said his plan to turn the Iraq Study Group recommendations into law is still in the mix, and Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) said he has spoken to senior administration officials about Sen. Joseph Biden Jr.’s (D-Del.) amendment endorsing a soft partition of Iraq.

“It seems to be the growing view that [binding] numbers are difficult to pass,” Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) said.

Referring to Reid and Sen. Russ Feingold’s (D-Wis.) plan to end funding for the war as of July 2008, he added: “Is Feingold going to pass? The answer is no. The question now is what can get 60 votes.”

Wednesday marked Nelson’s second meeting in as many days with like-minded centrists seeking middle ground on the war. Other attendees at such sit-downs have included Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Salazar, Nelson said.

Another bipartisan amendment that failed Wednesday, written by Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Specter, the panel’s senior Republican, would have given detainees held by the U.S. the right to challenge their imprisonment in court.

Leahy and Specter sought to reverse a plank in last year’s Military Commissions Act, which faces a looming Supreme Court challenge. Their amendment to restore detainees’ habeas corpus rights picked up eight votes since 2006, falling only four votes short of overcoming a GOP filibuster.

Hagel, Snowe and Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) cast their first votes in favor of habeas restoration, leaving human-rights groups heartened. Both Leahy and Specter vowed to keep pressing for 60 votes on their plan.

“Constitutional principles need our defense not so much when it is popular to do so as when it may not be popular or easy to do,” Leahy said.

Although some legal scholars predict that legislation on habeas corpus may not be necessary after the high court hears a challenge to last year’s law, the White House strongly opposed the amendment.

“I don’t think that Congress needs to constantly change the law while the courts are still looking at it,” White House spokeswoman Dana Perino told reporters Wednesday.