Interesting Amendments yesterday from Feingold and Clinton on Iraq

[TayTay]

This is from the Daily Digest of the Congressional Record: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/r110query.html Latest Daily Digest, top of the page.

SA 231. Mrs. CLINTON submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 470, to express the sense of Congress on Iraq; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

On page 9, strike line 24.

On page 10, and 18, strike ``intervention.'', and insert the following: intervention; and

(13) no United States military forces should be deployed to Iraq after the date of the enactment of this Act unless the Secretary of Defense certifies to Congress before such deployment that such forces are adequately equipped and trained for the missions to be discharged by such forces in Iraq.

SA 232. Mr. FEINGOLD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 470, to express the sense of Congress on Iraq; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Beginning on page 7, strike line 10 and all that follows through page 8, line 13, and insert the following:

(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.--It is the sense of Congress that--

(1) the Senate disagrees with the President's plan to escalate United States military involvement in Iraq.

(2) Congress should establish an end-date for the deployment of United States military forces in Iraq;

(3) the Senate believes a failed state in Iraq would present a threat to regional and world peace, and the long-term security interests of the United States are best served by an Iraq that can sustain, govern, and defend itself, and serve as an ally in the war against extremists;

Interesting split. Sen. Clinton is proposing freezing troop levels at some unknown level, but it is a freeze neverthe less. (The actual wording says to freeze troop levels at what it is when this bill is enacted.)

Sen. Feingold wants an end date on getting our troops out of Iraq. I think most of the Democratic debate on this will occur between these two pillars. (Lieberman is not part of the Democratic debate on this. What he wants doesn't matter.)

[sandnsea]

1. I think Hillary's is something else

A week or so ago there were posts that troops were going to Iraq without the specific war-time field training that is available in California and Louisiana only. They were scheduled for the training and it got cancelled in order to be shipped for Bush's surge. Hillary's wording sounds like it's addressing that sort of thing "unless...forces are adequately equipped and trained..". Which is good, but not a troop freeze. Unless I'm reading it wrong.

[Mass]

2. I read it the same way you did.\nt

[Mass]

3. Concerning Feingold, here is the audio of a conference call that he had with bloggers

after the vote, I think:

http://www.davidsirota.com/feingold4.mp3

Also, an account by Bob Geiger of the same thing.

http://bobgeiger.blogspot.com/2007/02/feingold-its-time-to-play-hardball-on.html