WASHINGTON, May 21, 2009

Senate Passes $91.3 Billion War Bill

Funding To Close Guantanamo Bay Prison Cut, But Bill Allows President To Ramp Up Afghan War

  •  (AP)

  • Interactive Gitmo Tribunals

    Detainees on trial, photos and a history of the naval base.

  • In-Depth Obama Presidency

    Photos, major events and key personalities in the Obama administration.

(AP)  The Senate on Thursday passed a $91.3 billion military spending bill, shorn of money President Barack Obama wants to close the Guantanamo Bay prison but allowing him to significantly ramp up the U.S. war in Afghanistan.

The Senate voted 86-3 to pass the bill, which provides money for military and diplomatic operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, setting up House-Senate talks on a compromise measure to present to Obama next month.

The spending measure closely tracks Obama's request for war funds, although the $80 million he was seeking to close the U.S. naval prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was dropped Wednesday.

A three-day Senate debate on the bill featured little of the angst over the situation in Afghanistan that permeated debate in the House last week on companion legislation.

Obama is sending more than 20,000 additional troops there and, for the first time next year, the annual cost of the war in Afghanistan is projected to exceed the cost of fighting in Iraq.

With support forces, the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan is expected to be about 68,000 by the end of the year - more than double the size of the U.S. force at the end of 2008.

Among the few cautionary voices was Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer.

"I want to give this administration ... the resources it needs to successfully end these wars," Boxer said. "I don't support an open-ended commitment of American troops to Afghanistan. And if we do not see measurable progress, we must reconsider our engagement and strategy there."

Debate pretty much fizzled after Democrats retreated and moved to delete from the bill money to close Guantanamo, where about 240 terrorism suspects still are held. The companion House bill had already taken that step.

The underlying war funding measure has gotten relatively little attention, even though it would boost total approved spending for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars above $900 billion.

The Pentagon would receive $73 billion under the legislation, including $4.6 billion to train and equip Afghan and Iraqi security forces; $400 million to train and equip Pakistan's security forces, and $21.9 billion to procure new mine-resistant vehicles, aircraft, weapons and ammunition, among other items.

The House version adds $11.8 billion to Obama's request, including almost $4 billion for new weapons and military equipment such as eight C-17 cargo planes, mine-resistant vehicles, Bradley Fighting Vehicles and Stryker armored vehicles. The House measure also adds $2.2 billion to Obama's request for foreign aid, much of which appears to be designed to get around spending limits for 2010.

The Senate measure contains less for weapons procurement and foreign aid, setting up potentially nettlesome negotiations.

In the end, several Senate amendments were added, including one to block the release under the Freedom of Information Act of government photographs showing the abuse of detainees. The administration is fighting the American Civil Liberties Union in federal court over the release of the photos, and the move was intended to bolster the government's legal position.

Republican Sen. Bob Corker won approval Thursday of an amendment requiring the president to set forth U.S. objectives in Afghanistan and Pakistan and issue quarterly reports detailing whether those goals were being met.


© MMIX, The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 18 Comments
by goaliedad56 May 22, 2009 1:34 PM EDT
And I can almost guarantee you in the next election they will ALL BE RE-ELECTED!!! People do not seem to care that these politicians have gone power crazy...not enough to actually vote them out of office!!!
Posted by itsjustathought at 7:49 PM : May 21, 2009

Ain't that the truth. People will complain all day long, but most of them won't take the time to do anything about. I guess the old adage "An action passed is an action complete" applies here. Those who complain, but do nothing about it must feel good at the end of the day knowing they voiced an opinion, of course that is all they are going to do. i

f you don't like what is going on in this country, then get off you butts and do something about it, in 2010 would be a great time to start.
Reply to this comment
by endrepubs May 22, 2009 10:30 AM EDT
Just more raping of the taxpayer on a war that can't be won. Read your history books Obama and Congress.
Reply to this comment
by babooph May 22, 2009 9:27 AM EDT
Did the voters not demand change ?Guess the lobbyists were more important again.
Reply to this comment
by Dgunner May 22, 2009 8:26 AM EDT
How easy it is to defraud the government. I was in the city yesterday, I over hearf a man talking . He said the food samp program is in bad dissarray. The only thing he had to do to increase his dollar amount was to pay his landlord another fifty dollars rent . This increased his amount from 54.00 dollars to 125.00. Where is the justice here for the people who can't afford to live in a 4.50.00 apartment but still need to eat although they worked and now thier unemployment has run out. Something is just not right about this.Thirty minutes before i got to this store a man ran out carrying meat without paying for it.The manager said if he neededm it that bad let him have it. Im afraid here will be more of this type theft in the future.
Reply to this comment
by formrusmcsgt May 22, 2009 7:37 AM EDT
If this is a legal, moral justification for war, then every American president of the last half-century has been guilty of a treasonous dereliction of duty for not launching a pre-emptive attack on the Soviet Union, whose actually existing arsenals of nation-destroying weapons were aimed openly and specifically at the United States for decades.
Posted by pythoncharly at 4:18 AM : May 22, 2009

Good point.
Reply to this comment
by formrusmcsgt May 22, 2009 7:09 AM EDT
and even though most women hated Palin because she is gorgeous and men were afraid of her intelligence and capability ......
Posted by clancy49 at 2:57 AM : May 22, 2009

You are obviously easily impressed.......

Hilarious.
Reply to this comment
by johninpennsyl May 22, 2009 6:33 AM EDT
Any deliberative body that can vote 93 billion $ for a worthless friggin war,but can't get funding for health care for its citizens is worthless to the people they (claim to)represent.
Thats right,they already got their perks-what a bunch of $hits.
Reply to this comment
by clancy49 May 22, 2009 5:57 AM EDT
Media weapon of mass distraction fired again. While everyone was focused on the jokers in a fake debate over nonsense, banks are bought by Carlyle (Bush family), the Credit Card bill that protects bankers, and now Congress gives even more money for more war creating a hotter fuel to explode in the Mid East. I was asked if I thought things would be better under McCain if he won. Since all contenders were equally dangerous I thought my answer was no. Since January I have changed my mind. So far the Dove of Peace has brought more war and turned into Mars the God of War, created even greater debt, given greater protection to corporations, made the Bush family even richer along with himself, made the Federal Reserve in stronger, brought in and acted on every campaign policy McCain spoke of, and returned Washington DC to the corrupt times of the Clinton era. Yes, McCain would have been better, and even though most women hated Palin because she is gorgeous and men were afraid of her intelligence and capability she would have been a whirlwind of fresh air in the city of entrenched corruption. Yes, a McCain administration would have been better for this country. The only difference is thanks to the Media and Weapons of Mass Distraction, we feel better about being led to slaughter. The media would not have made sure we were miserable if McCain won. I'm only talking about what would have been better for the country, not how good we'd feel about it. Before you red and blue scream at me, i'm purple. I'm an American. I want what is good for my country, not your blasted politics. All I see right now is that this President is protecting the evil of his predecessors knowing he needs to protect himself. I see this President has followed everything his opponent campaigned on. I see this President is controlled by banks and financial corporations. I see this President has serious raacial issues. I see this President as a wolf in sheep's clothing. I see this President as leading us into two wars we cannot win. Most of all I see this President as a cheap liar that lied his way to his position. I see McCain as being honest with American people, but not charismatic. Yes, now I say we would have been better off with McCain. i don't drink burundanga.
Reply to this comment
by ftsumner1 May 22, 2009 5:33 AM EDT
Or maybe a squiggle and a schmigglydiggle.
Reply to this comment
by ftsumner1 May 22, 2009 5:00 AM EDT
Nokia 3210c, I see that English is not your native language. Let me help you: Creo que la guerra es necesario para reemplazar en parte las protecciones naturales en el orden del universo que el ser humano ha abatido. Por ejemplo, la poblacion ha aumentado hasta el punto de poner en peligro toda la humanidad, como resultado de las avanzas en la medicina, la agricola, etc. Necesitamos la guerra para matar al exceso de tontos que escriben cosas en este 'forum.' Gracias.
Reply to this comment
by demongirl60 May 22, 2009 4:59 AM EDT
Figures.... they can waste money on a STUPID war but they can't seem to get a stimulus down here to the WORKING PEOPLE.
*sheesh*
Reply to this comment
by nokia3210c May 22, 2009 4:49 AM EDT
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND Y USA SHOULD INVOLVES ITSELF IN THE SO CALLED WARS OF PRECTIONISM, OR IN SIMPLE TERMS "PROTECT AMERICAN INTERESTS". WHY SHOULD AMERICAN BLOOD IN AFGHANISTAN OR ELSEWHERE. DONT THESE CHILDREN OF AMERICA HAVE MOTHERS AND FATHERS WHO PLACED THEIR HOPES IN THEM (THESE US SOLDIERS). OR IT IS JUST A SACRIFICING YOUR OWN BLOOD FOR SOMETHING 1 CANNOT EVEN UNDERSTAND.
WHY ALL THESE WARS ARE FOUGHT IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES!!
AMERICAN CHILDREN DIE THERE! WHY? WHY? FOR GOD'S SAKE. STOP IT AND STOP IT RIGHT NOW!!!
I THOUGHT OBAMA WAS THE RIGHT ONE, BUT NOW HE SEEMS TO INCLINE TO WHAT BUSH STARTED, IN FACT HIS WILL E MAJOR SHOWDOWN............... WATCH THE SPACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply to this comment
by opedpaulanderson May 22, 2009 3:07 AM EDT
Now THAT is change we can believe in!

Yes We Can!

Obama!
Reply to this comment
by budmag06 May 22, 2009 12:53 AM EDT
HA! HA! Obama's war! Didn't he promise to end the wars? The joke's on Obama's supporters! Just watch, under Obama, funding of the war is acceptable. Take a close look here at comments posted here about Obama's 91.3 billion war funding increase. They will start out with Bush, Cheney, Limbaugh, Palin, Prejean, etc..
Reply to this comment
by nofoolling May 22, 2009 12:26 AM EDT
The spending measure closely tracks Obama's request for war funds, although the $80 million he was seeking to close the U.S. naval prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was dropped Wednesday.

80 million to close the prison? These people are all criminals.

Lock the dam door and walk away.
Reply to this comment
by scabbard2 May 21, 2009 11:30 PM EDT
WASHINGTON - Military contractor KBR Inc. was paid $83.4 million in bonuses for electrical work in Iraq ? much of it after the U.S. military's contract management agency recognized the contractor was doing shoddy electrical work, a senator said Wednesday.

The KBR bill must be due again. I understand they didn't do any additional work, and it wasn't shoddy, so go ahead and release the funds.
Reply to this comment
by indivthinker May 21, 2009 11:17 PM EDT
$91,300,000,000 --> all from the Chinese.

Though if we do borrow money from the Chinese, I would hope it would be for military spending. That way, we can use the weapons against them when the inevitable World War III comes after China demands that we compensate them for the debt. Ironic isn't it... our natural enemy basically giving us money to build weapons to fight them.

This makes me ask the question, which country is more foolish: the United States for borrowing trillions from China, or China for allowing that loan to be spent on weapons?
Reply to this comment
by stn_sage May 21, 2009 10:21 PM EDT
Congratulations, Congress! An ABSOLUTE waste of money! Another 91.3 billion flushed down the toilet---along with the bailout money---this Congress is going to distinguish itself in the annals of American history as the most wasteful Congress of all-time!
Reply to this comment
See all 18 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie." Watch Now

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: