In narrow vote, House approves $106B to maintain war operations in Iraq and Afghanistan

House votes to fund wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

WASHINGTON — The House has narrowly approved a $106 billion bill to ensure financing for war operations in Iraq and Afghanistan over the coming months.

Passage of the bill comes over almost united opposition from Republicans, who objected to the inclusion of money in the legislation for an International Monetary Fund loan program for poor countries.

The vote was 226-202.

The measure contains about $80 billion to fund defense activities in Iraq and Afghanistan through the end of September. It also contains some $10 billion for foreign aid, $7.7 billion to combat the flu pandemic, and $1 billion in rebates for consumers who turn in their old cars for more fuel-efficient models.

The Senate is expected to take up the bill as early as this week.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic leaders searched for votes Tuesday as the House took up a $106 billion bill to fund wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Complicating the outcome is the inclusion of money for poor countries, aid to Pakistan, pandemic flu preparation and government rebates to people who trade in gas-guzzling cars.

The Pentagon has said that without the bill the Army could start running out of war funds as early as July. President Barack Obama has pushed for the package, arguing that it is crucial to his efforts to wind down operations in Iraq while boosting personnel and fighting power in Afghanistan.

But Republicans, normally solid supporters of military spending, mobilized against the bill because of the addition of $5 billion needed to secure a $108 billion U.S. line of credit to the International Monetary Fund to help poor countries deal with the world recession.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs defended the initiative, saying Obama had made a commitment at the G-20 meeting in London in April. “This is important relief to ensure that we have strong global trade. I don’t think, given where we are in the world economy, that we would want to see a pullback in that commitment.”

But Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, R-Calif., top Republican on the Armed Services Committee, contended that Democrats were endangering troops by shifting money to create room for a “global bailout loan program.”

Unable to count on Republicans, Democrats had to appeal to some of the 51 anti-war colleagues who opposed the legislation when it was first offered in May. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, indicated that he wouldn’t change his “no” vote. “America has to start taking care of things here at home and we can’t do it by continuing to support wars based on lies.”

“One of the problems is we have some very deep-seated philosophical views that pursuing Afghanistan and Iraq with additional funding is not appropriate,” said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. “I think we have the votes,” he said, noting that saying he was confident “might overstate it.”

It was unclear if the measure would come to a final vote Tuesday.

There are several other factors that could sway votes: there’s support for $7.7 billion included to combat the pandemic flu threat and lawmakers with links to the auto industry favor the $1 billion for a “cash for clunkers” program providing up to $4,500 in vouchers for consumer who trade in old cars for more fuel-efficient models.

Fiscally conservative lawmakers could also resist the nearly $7 billion in “add-ons,” funds not sought by the Pentagon, that the House and Senate included in the compromise they reached last week. The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation said those additions include controversial programs that the Pentagon did not want, such as $2.17 billion for eight C-17 transport planes.

Passage of the bill, which provides funds through the end of this fiscal year on Sept. 30, would bring to nearly $1 trillion the amount spent on the wars and other security matters since the Sept. 11 attacks. More than 70 percent of that has gone to Iraq, the Congressional Research Service said in an analysis.

Congress has passed similar war supplementals — meaning the money is not part of the regular Pentagon budget and adds to the federal deficit — every year since 2001. The White House has said that this will be the last war supplemental and that future spending will go through the regular appropriations process.

The administration is seeking $130 billion for war funds in the fiscal year 2010 starting in October, down from about $143 billion this year and $183 billion in fiscal 2008, the CRS said.

Obama’s original request last October was for about $83 billion, including $75.5 billion for defense purposes. But as is customary, Congress used the must-pass bill as a vehicle for bills, such as the “cash for clunkers” measure and $534 million in bonuses for military personnel whose enlistments have been involuntarily extended.

The measure includes $10.4 billion in foreign aid, with $2.4 billion for Pakistan, $1.4 billion for economic development in Afghanistan and $700 million in international food aid.

House-Senate negotiators also reached compromises on several policy controversies: they denied the White House $80 million to close the detention center at Guantanamo but agreed that detainees could be transferred to the United States to face trial. The issue of imprisoning convicted terrorists in the United States was put off for another day.

President Obama also personally guaranteed that he would stop the release of photos showing U.S. troops abusing detainees.

The bill is H.R. 2346

On the Net:

Congress: thomas.loc.gov