fighting Nancy Pelosi threatens antiwar legislators…

…who won’t vote for her Iraq appropriations bill!

speaker-gets-tough-too-2007-03-20.html>

It’s tough to get 218 votes, so Speaker gets tough, too By Jonathan E. Kaplan March 21, 2007

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is holding the implied threat of lost =

committee seats over the heads of Democratic Caucus members who may =

vote against her $124 billion Iraq war supplemental bill.

Faced with the possibility of losing the first really big vote since =

taking majority control in the November elections, Pelosi is talking =

tough to wavering lawmakers and isolating those opposed to the bill.

Democrats picked up some undecided lawmakers yesterday as they edged =

closer to the 218 votes they need to pass the bill when it reaches =

the House floor tomorrow or Friday. Pelosi is spending 90 percent of =

her time trying to sway the 10 percent of the caucus that is either =

undecided or opposed to the bill, according to a senior lawmaker and =

a leadership aide.

She has been hardest on members of the Appropriations Committee and =

her fellow Californians who oppose the measure. The Speaker pointedly =

reminded Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), a leading opponent of the bill, =

that she had appointed her to the Appropriations Committee, three =

Democratic lawmakers said.

The message was simple, the lawmakers said: Pelosi could also remove =

Lee from the panel.

During a meeting last week with appropriators, Pelosi reminded them =

that serving on the panel was a privilege, admonishing lawmakers from =

safe districts who feel they have the luxury to vote how they want =

without consequences =97 as opposed to Democrats elected in swing =

districts who do not, a Democratic appropriator said.

“The meeting with appropriators was a frank and open discussion where =

the Speaker addressed the magnitude of the vote in committee and the =

need to hold the Bush administration and Iraqis accountable and bring =

our troops home,” Pelosi’s spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, said. “It =

shouldn’t be interpreted in any other manner.”

Lee was the only Democratic appropriator to oppose the bill last week =

when it passed on a largely party-line vote, the only lawmaker to =

oppose going to war in Afghanistan in 2001, and was appointed to the =

Appropriations Committee this year.

Lee declined to comment for this story.

Pelosi also has met with members of the Progressive Caucus several =

times in the past two weeks. A lawmaker said the tension between =

Pelosi and Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), a chief deputy whip and a =

founder of the Out of Iraq Caucus, was noticeable. The two =

Californians sat at opposite ends of a long table in Pelosi’s office =

as Waters, her arms crossed, listened to Pelosi make her case for the =

bill.

Liberal Democrats also feel that House leaders have tried to isolate =

them as a power in the caucus. Some have complained that Democratic =

leaders accommodated the wishes of conservative Democrats in the =

legislation, but neglected liberals.

In particular, House leaders removed a provision requiring President =

Bush to seek congressional approval if he attacked Iran. Blue Dog =

Democrats wanted the provision stripped from the bill.

When the Appropriations Committee considered the spending bill, Lee =

was the only anti-war speaker and she spoke last before the House =

called a vote.

“They took up spinach before they took up her. If it is a subtle =

effort to intimidate it is not working =85 I did not like the way that =

looked,” Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) said.

Meanwhile, House Democratic leaders predicted they would have the 218 =

votes needed to pass the bill.

“Do I have 218 people that I know are definite ‘yeses’ right this =

minute? The answer to that is no. =85 Do I think we will have 218 votes =

on this bill when we call it up for a vote? The answer to that is =

yes,” Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters yesterday. =

“[Do] I think we will need to delay it? I hope the answer to that is =

no and believe it is no.”

Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) faced dissent within the =

Democratic whip organization. Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a chief deputy =

whip, said he would vote against the bill.

Clyburn also told reporters that Waters was not whipping against the =

measures. But minutes before that press conference, Waters told =

reporters she was soliciting support for her side.

“I changed my mind after leadership changed their mind,” she said, =

adding that she is willing to be stripped of her whip’s post for =

bucking leadership.

“That’s fair, to take responsibility to your actions,” she said.

Whether that would happen is unclear. A leadership aide noted that =

Democratic leaders have “long memories.”

Democrats received good news from Reps. John Tanner (D-Tenn.) and Jan =

Schakowsky (D-Ill.), both chief deputy whips, who announced that they =

would back the bill.

“We’re getting the job done and it’s a strength that we include =

members from the entire spectrum of our caucus in the whip =

organization,” said Kristie Greco, Clyburn’s spokeswoman.

Schakowsky, a founder of the Out of Iraq Caucus, announced yesterday =

that she would support the spending measure and lobby fellow =

Democrats to vote for it.

“I would have written a different bill and not spent money, but this =

is a step on the path to bringing our troops home,” Schakowsky told =

reporters. “It’s my desire to view this as a partial victory … this =

vote is the beginning of the end of the war in Iraq.”

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) told his fellow Democrats at their =

weekly caucus meeting that he would support the bill, too.

Leave a Reply