Way back on April 3, I gave an appreciation of where we were then with Iraq legislation, with a brief rundown of the story so far. Referring to the Murtha Proviso (once much loved before it picked up a presidential waiver proviso), I said

The main purpose of the Proviso (and the provisions current in the two versions of HR 1591) can only have been to draw a veto and trigger an inter-branch crisis: to wield the power of the purse and bring Bush to the negotiating table.

There would - this is still my interpretation - have been the most public of confrontations, quite different from the kind of connoisseurs-only stuff we've enjoyed so far. The public - the same public now wanting to get out of Iraq - would be put on the spot: back the Dems, who were trying to give them their wish, or go for business as usual with Bush.

Window-dressing apart, there only has ever been one choice to make: to confront Bush (as per the quote) or to give in.

Essentially, all the Congressional activity to date has been window-dressing. Which is not to say that it's been worthless: the Dems are the majority and have to be seen to do something. Hence the placeholder nonbinding resolutions - remember those? - and the long drawn out action on HR 1591, the bill doomed to be - made to be - vetoed.

There's more...

Take a trip down Memory Lane to April 2007 to contemplate the fate of the Reid-Feingold bill S 1077.

R-F was announced on April 2 - Jerome broke the glad tidings here - a few days after HR 1591 passed the Senate.

The R-F splash came after the Obama Chicken Weekend, with Rangel chipping in with a pledge of no defunding. The idea was that offering for consideration a simple withdrawal bill was a way of taking the edge off supporters' disappointment with the apparent lack of fight in Congress.

Follow the tag, and you'll see stuff peters out a fortnight after the grand launch. So far as I'm aware - no Nexis, no idea - talk of R-F died away.

There's more...

On Sunday April 8 - my piece then - Levin said on ABC

We're not going to vote to cut funding, period.

Yesterday - on Fox - there was this:

WALLACE: But bottom line, Senator Levin, before I bring in Senator Graham, the Democrats will not allow money to run out for the troops.

LEVIN: That is absolutely correct. We've made that clear. We never have allowed that to happen.

So at least one thing is clear, m'kay?

There's more...

I approach the CBS poll of April 13 as a rank and puzzled amateur.

My hypothesis, still unshaken, is that the American public wants to have its cake and eat it on Iraq. And that mere polling fails to put Sixpack on the spot, like real life does.

Let's see how the CBS poll helps.

The #1 question is What should Congress do about Iraq War Funding?

There's more...

The timetable on Iraq - the legislative timetable, that is! - is, apparently, that Bush will get the Iraq supplemental bill HR 1591 by the end of the month.

Whereupon he will veto.

Whereupon - a guy prognosticates over at the Prospect so I don't have to.

There's more...