Advertisement

Emergency War Funds Questioned

Share
Times Staff Writers

Some of President Bush’s most loyal allies in Congress said Wednesday that they want to scale back his request for nearly $82 billion in emergency spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The House Republican leadership may strip $4 billion in foreign aid from the emergency funding request, an aide to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) said Wednesday. DeLay, speaking to reporters in his office, said that Bush’s request included expenses “that probably do not qualify as immediate emergencies.”

Appearing before House and Senate committees, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld faced skeptical questioning from lawmakers concerned that costs seemingly unrelated to the war -- including aid to the Palestinian Authority and funds to restructure the Army -- were included in the bill.

Advertisement

The bipartisan critics are highlighting what they describe as sleight-of-hand budgeting since the start of the war on terrorism in 2001. Few Republicans have said so publicly, but many Democrats have accused the administration of hiding big increases in spending -- beyond the 4.8% increase in the regular Pentagon budget -- in the special war funding bill.

The emergency war bill receives less scrutiny and is more politically perilous to oppose than the regular Pentagon spending measure. Analysts believe Sen. John F. Kerry’s 2003 vote against an emergency war spending bill hurt the Massachusetts Democrat in his presidential bid last year.

DeLay, like many lawmakers in both parties, said he wanted some requests taken out of the emergency spending measure and added to next year’s budget.

Of particular concern is $200 million the White House would give the Palestinian Authority, said the DeLay aide, speaking on condition of anonymity.

“He wants to make sure that the funding doesn’t get into the hands of any terrorist organization within Palestine, and he wants to make sure that the Palestinian Authority is actually pushing for peace -- not just in words, but actually following it up in actions,” the aide said.

Republican deficit hawks are also concerned about $780 million being sought for new aid to countries providing international peacekeeping forces and additional funds sought for the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.

Advertisement

At a meeting between the House Republican Conference and White House budget director Joshua B. Bolten, Republicans said they feared the foreign aid portion of the emergency request would be a hard sell to their constituents.

Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, questioned whether some of the funding -- for the Pentagon as well as foreign aid programs -- needed to be approved on an emergency basis.

“I think that everybody in the House is going to want to take the position of supporting the troops,” Lewis said, but added that Congress must ensure that the funds are being spent for emergencies.

Democrats were more blunt in their criticism. At a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing, Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) scolded Rumsfeld.

“I have to tell you, Mr. Secretary, this seems to me to be an abuse -- an extraordinary abuse -- of the supplemental process,” Byrd said.

Earlier in the day, at a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher (D-Walnut Creek) chided Rumsfeld. “I think that there’s bipartisan concern about the use of these supplementals to fund existing operations,” she said.

Advertisement

When Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) asked Rumsfeld why nonemergency items were included in the emergency supplemental bill, the Pentagon chief said the decision was “beyond my pay grade” but added, “It has to be done.”

Rumsfeld maintained that some of the funding that seemed unrelated to the war actually was related. Money for Army restructuring would increase the number of active-duty combat brigades from 33 to 43, forming smaller but more nimble units and allowing soldiers to remain home longer between deployments in the war zones.

Some Democrats questioned why war funding was financed by emergency bills at all.

In the case of Iraq, Tauscher said the administration was “funding a war of choice on borrowed money.” Rumsfeld insisted that there was not enough time to fund the war through the normal budgetary process.

“There’s never been a war that was predictable as to length, casualty or cost in the history of mankind,” Rumsfeld said. “Anyone who attempts to do it is, within a relatively short order, proven to be not quite as wise as they thought they were.”

Rumsfeld and Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, were questioned by lawmakers about the size of the Iraqi insurgency. Iraq’s director of intelligence has estimated that there are 40,000 hard-core fighters and 200,000 less-committed insurgents.

The Pentagon has two figures from the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency that are “considerably different than that number and considerably lower,” Myers told House members.

Advertisement

“Frankly, I don’t have a lot of confidence in any of them,” Rumsfeld said.

Times staff writers Mary Curtius and Janet Hook contributed to this report.

Advertisement