it's nice to see them revive the war funding debate in congress. when it died in may, i thought that would end the matter until the fall.
congressional leaders are pointing to recent republican defections to reviving the funding cutoff debate. but i think those defections are just an excuse. the sudden revival has more to do with the depth of opposition to the war in this country--and especially among congressional leaders' own democratic constituents.
conservatives have been crowing about how the democratic controlled congress' approval ratings are even worse than the president. but congressional approval plummeted after it was clear that they were going to stop pushing for a withdrawal from iraq. in other words, the loss of support wasn't a sign that the people were turning against the democrats. it was a sign that democrats were losing faith in their own congress. (that's why, for example, the polls show that a majority of americans say that democratic control of congress is good for the country, even as they were saying they disapproved of what congress was doing) that, and not senator lugar giving a speech, is really what got people like harry reid to start a new iraq pullout push.
that being said, i don't think this new cutoff attempt will work. but it's a good strategy to bring it to a vote. they should do it again and again, from now until it passes. each time forcing members of congress to cast a vote for the unpopular war as it gets closer and closer to the election. so long as bush is in the white house, it's unlikely much legislation that the democrats want will pass anyway. they might as well focus on the one issue that americans keep rating as the most important.
