GOP Moderates Warn Bush On Iraq

In the hours leading up to Congress' latest vote on a funding bill for the Iraq War, Republican moderates met with President Bush in what has been characterized as a "very frank" discussion with the president.

During a private meeting in the White House residence Tuesday, attended by Mr. Bush, several key White House officials and 11 moderate Republicans, the Congressional leaders warned the president that their continued support comes at a price — namely, certifiable proof of progress in the war.

They really gave it to the president, says CBS News Chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer, basically telling him if there is not a dramatic change on the ground in Iraq, the president is not going to be able to hold the Republican support he now has on Capitol Hill.

The meeting was a prelude to Vice President Dick Cheney's surprise trip to Iraq Wednesday, during which he met with Iraqi officials on a variety of issues, from security in Baghdad to the Iraqi parliament's announced two-month summer recess. One administration official characterized the tone of Cheney's message to be, "We've got to get this work done. It's game time."

That seems to have been the message from Congressional Republicans to the White House as well.

Mr. Bush was reportedly told that the war is unsustainable without public support and is having a corrosive effect on the GOP's political fortunes. Congressman Charles Dent says he told the president that his Pennsylvania constituents are "impatient, and in some cases have a sense of futility" about the war.

Virginia Republican Tom Davis says he told the president that recent polling data from his suburban Washington district shows Bush's unfavorability ratings exceeded his approval ratings.

"We asked them what's Plan B," said Davis. "We let them know that the status quo is not acceptable."

Davis told CBS Radio affiliate WTOP, "Members are saying, you know, 'My constituents don't care if we lose this war, they want out of this at this point,' and just giving him the public mood."

"The president listened, he was engaged," Davis said. "This was not what I'd call a 'suck-up' session."

However, Davis also said the president responded that if he began discussing a new strategy, his current one never would have a chance to succeed.

Following the reports on the president's meeting, White House spokesman Tony Snow will only say there are "a number of different views" within the president's party on "how to proceed in Iraq," reports CBS News White House correspondent Peter Maer.

Snow said any claims of a Republican revolt are wrong, and he tried to change the subject to what he described as disunity among Democrats on Iraq war funding.

Moderate Republicans up for reelection in 2008 are "very anxious to get this thing over with," says CBSNews.com Senior Political Editor Vaughn Ververs. "They're going to start defecting — and Democrats are just waiting for that to happen."

Today, Mr. Bush attended a "tank session" at the Pentagon, where he received the latest assessment on Iraq from the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Mr. Bush continues to believe that the surge in U.S. forces will help secure the Iraqi capital and let the government there stabilize the country, says CBS News correspondent Mark Knoller, but the Pentagon says it cannot come to a fair judgment on that until September.

Following his Pentagon meeting, Mr. Bush said the White House will seek agreement with Congress on benchmarks to measure progress in Iraq. At the same time, re repeated his pledge to veto a bill that would cut of funding for the war by the end of July.

"We reject that idea. It won't work," the president said.

White House officials decided the president should change course by declaring what he is for since he been emphatic about what he is against.

"One message I have heard from people of both parties is that benchmarks make sense and I agree," Mr. Bush said. He said his chief of staff, Joshua Bolten, would talk with congressional leaders "to find common ground on benchmarks.

While the White House is calling the President's Pentagon meeting "routine," there is nothing routine about public messages being made by three retired generals. In ads being run by the advocacy group VoteVet.org, the retired officers challenge the president's argument that he listens to his commanders on the ground in Iraq.

"I am outraged, as are the majority of Americans. I'm a lifelong Republican, but it's past time for change," retired Maj. Gen. John Batiste told reporters in a conference call. "Our strategy in Iraq today is more of the same, a slow grind to nowhere which totally ignores the reality of Iraq and the lessons of history. Our president ignores sound military advice and surrounds himself with like-minded and compliant subordinates."

"The fact is, the president has never listened to the soldiers on the ground effectively," said retired NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark, who ran for president in 2004. "This administration is not listening to the troops and is not supporting them."

This latest funding bill, which Congress is expected to vote on today, is what Democrats call the "60 Day" option: Funding military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for $42.8 billion until July, and then requiring a report from the president certifying that there has been progress, before another vote on approving an additional $53.8 billion.

Many Republicans say they won't approve a bill that, they say, treats troops like children waiting for a monthly allowance.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates told lawmakers such a move would be disastrous. "In essence, the bill asks me to run the Department of Defense like a skiff, and I'm trying to drive the biggest supertanker in the world," he said.

House Democratic leaders say the legislation once again has united Democrats in challenging Mr. Bush on the war. While this may be true, it has not attracted enough Republicans to override a second veto and has raised doubts among Senate Democrats.

"Enough is enough," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. "It is time to get a clean bill to the president's desk and really support our troops."

Three Congressmen — Reps. Frank Wolf, R-Va.; Michael McCaul, R-Tex.; and Mark Udall, D-Colo. — circulated a letter Wednesday urging their colleagues to co-sponsor legislation that would put in place recommendations from the independent Iraq Study Group.

One of the 79 suggestions from the bipartisan group in December was reducing U.S. "political, military or economic support" for Iraq if the Baghdad government could not make substantial progress toward providing for the country's security. The report suggested an urgent diplomatic attempt to stabilize Iraq and allow the withdrawal of most U.S. combat troops by early 2008.

"When the country is together, we are strong and can respond to our problems effectively," the three House Republicans wrote. "The more we are divided, the harder this becomes."

Last week, Sen. John Warner, R-Va., said he had an idea that had enough support to override a veto: A proposal which would pressure the Iraqi government to take more initiative on political and security reforms. On Wednesday, Warner said he was reassessing in light of the new
House proposal.

Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and John Sununu, R-N.H., said they are open to considering conditions on foreign aid to Iraq if the Baghdad government fails to meet certain benchmarks.

Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., said he agrees that withholding reconstruction money is a good idea. But he thinks the president should be the one to do it based on a White House review of progress reports.