Though it was only recently, in January of 2007, that Petraeus was confirmed
unanimously by the United States Senate to command of U.S. troops in
Iraq, few on the Hill seem to want to listen to his advice. Politics is
more important.
An interesting feature of the Conference Report passed last evening is
the items it did contain: no money for the troops without a pullout
timetable but lots of earmarks. The House version of the Iraq funding
bill still includes most of the "pork barrel" spending that was in place
when it passed in the original form. (A conference report is the result
of differences between House and Senate legislation worked out and
brought back for a final vote.)
There remains $3.5 billion for
agricultural disaster relief, money for the Senate gift shop, salaries
for farm service workers and $650 million to bail out one State's poorly
run health insurance program for children - none of which has anything
to do with the military but much to do with the business of re-election.
An unfortunate precedent has been set for future administrations and
future military appropriations. Unofficially, there are plans already
underway for another appropriations bill in the House, where the process
will have to start all over again fairly soon but it is a sad day when
elected Representatives play political games with military funding and
our troops must hear about it on the battlefield.
It never should have come to this point. Now that it has, let the
vetoing begin.