Growing congressional concerns with Iraq.
Congress Seeking Bush's Iraq Strategy
Lawmakers Express Nation's Growing Unease
By David S. Broder and Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, September 3, 2003; Page A10
washingtonpost.com
Returning members of Congress yesterday reported growing concern among their constituents about the turmoil and casualties in Iraq, signaling more pressure from Capitol Hill for President Bush to spell out his strategy for gaining control of the postwar situation.
Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.), chairman of the House International Relations Committee, reflecting a sense of anxiety heard by members of both parties, said he wants to "combat a sense of drift" about U.S. policy in Iraq and bring in more international assistance.
Most of the half-dozen senators interviewed yesterday said they sensed mounting unease over the series of bombings in Iraq and the continuing loss of American lives. But few reported any demands for an American pullback.
"Mainly, people want reassurance that the administration knows what it's doing," said Sen. Robert F. Bennett (R-Utah), "that things are going better than CNN would have us believe."
Some Democrats described the anxiety level at home in starker terms. "There's a real deep concern now," said Rep. John M. Spratt Jr. (S.C.). "People are wondering how much this will cost in money and lives and how are we gonna get out of there? I had one teacher say, 'We've got a tar baby on our hands.' "
The congressional comments came before reports of a White House decision yesterday to seek a new U.N. Security Council resolution that could clear the way for the introduction of new international troops in Iraq -- a move that could help alleviate lawmakers' concerns.
Returning members said they received as many or more questions about domestic issues as they did about Iraq. Spratt and Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) said, "The economy is the number one concern," and others mentioned prescription drugs, gasoline prices, highways, immigration and other concerns.
Reps. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and C.L. "Butch" Otter (R-Idaho) said they found more people worried about administration policy regarding the USA Patriot Act, and its implications for civil liberties, than the situation in Iraq. But the shift in public opinion on Iraq was noted by many in both parties.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said his constituents "have gone from a sense of exhilaration over the victory to a sense of deep concern. They need to be told what it's going to take and what to expect."
Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.), who supported the resolution authorizing the use of force against Saddam Hussein, said, "There's been an amazing turnaround" in Las Vegas. "There was tremendous support here" for military action. "Now a lot of people are questioning: Are we stuck there? Is it going to be another Vietnam? Once we passed the threshold, where more people were killed after we declared victory than before, people began to keep a body count."
Nonetheless, said Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), "there's also a recognition that we cannot just pull up stakes and leave." The mood, he said, "is something between resignation and determination."
In a similar vein, Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) said, "There's some concern as they see us losing troops on a fairly regular basis, but the sentiment is that this isn't the time for us to cut and run. They want to know, how are things really going? Is it as bad as it seems on the news?"
Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) said some Americans link the worrisome bulletins from Iraq to concerns about budget deficits and unemployment, making them "very tentative and unsure." As a result, he said, the administration is likely to face "a lot of tough questions" this fall.
Administration officials are bracing for a barrage of congressional hearings on Iraq policy. The Senate Armed Services Committee plans to hear next week from Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz and Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee also is expected to have an Iraq hearing this month.
Hyde plans to hold a hearing next week on his "Iraq Liberation Act of 2003," which, among other things, urges Bush to involve NATO and other nations in "a major peacekeeping and civil order mission" in Iraq. Hyde said he was accelerating his action because "I think the insurgency that's going on in Iraq is dangerous and shows no signs of lessening. The effort to involve other countries in the rehabilitation and pacification of Iraq seems to be foundering right now. There seems to be a lack of consensus within the administration."
Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.), chairman of the appropriations subcommittee with jurisdiction over the State Department, echoed that concern, saying the administration needs to bring in "as many NATO countries as possible, as quickly as possible."
Much of the pressure to bring in other forces stems from a concern about the length of U.S. troop deployments and the risks troops face each day. "There's an ongoing debate and concern about when these servicemen and women, those in the National Guard and Reserves, are coming home, particularly when [Americans] turn on the television and see a mounting toll every day," Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.) said.
"They would like the world community to be involved," said Rep. Allen Boyd Jr. (D-Fla.). "They don't think we can do it ourselves."
Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Tex.) said that back home, "some are wondering if we should invite other troops in, and have more of an international presence." But Brady said he was wary of such a move.
"I don't think we'll win the war running it by committee," he said. He said his younger brother, Matthew, an Army medic just back from Iraq, had told him, "The soldiers aren't panicking in Iraq, so why should you in Washington panic?"
Staff writers Helen Dewar and Juliet Eilperin contributed to this report. |
