Republican Congress Tightens Purse Strings

Some Experts See Legislature Being More Assertive

Emboldened by the decline in President Bush's approval ratings, the Iraq prisoner abuse scandal and setbacks in the Iraq war, the Republican Congress is showing signs of taking a more assertive approach to its dealings with the administration.

One Senate committee is holding hearings into abuse of prisoners in Iraq and a second is about to issue a report on intelligence failures before the Iraq war. Early this month, a House Appropriations subcommittee, meeting behind closed doors, quickly rejected Bush's request for a free hand in spending a $25 billion contingency fund for the war in Iraq, stipulating instead how all but $1 billion would be used.

The same day, the Senate voted 95 to 0 to approve the war money with slightly less stringent conditions.

Republican legislators openly -- but seldom for the record -- vent their frustration to reporters about the Bush administration's secrecy, reluctance to consult and seeming contempt for the institution's processes. There have been some instances of rebellion.

Defying a White House veto threat, House and Senate leaders are moving ahead with a six-year transportation bill whose final price tag may be at least $28 billion higher than the figure the administration says is acceptable. Negotiations between GOP leaders in Congress and the White House quickly broke down.

Former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) said the restiveness is real and probably inevitable. "As a practical matter it can't take full form until after the election, but I would be very surprised if by January -- even with Bush reelected -- that you don't see substantially more assertion of oversight."

"The institutional jealousies built into the Constitution do work over time, and they should," he said. "If [the war on terrorism] is going to be a long conflict with an irreconcilable wing of Islam, then I think Congress has to exercise routine oversight and do it routinely. Of course the Defense Department and the intelligence community should be accountable."

Former Senate majority leader Robert J. Dole (R-Kan.) said: "I see signs of this, and it's reassuring. When a catastrophic event happens, everyone is going to do almost anything [to help the president]. But when you get down the road a little bit, you want to see what we did wrong or how much money we spent."

Democrats say such scattered actions do not constitute a sea change. "The [GOP-controlled] House has refused again and again to exercise its responsibility for oversight over this administration," says Rep. Henry A. Waxman (Calif.), ranking Democrat on the Government Reform Committee.

Republicans leaders, Waxman charged, have rebuffed Democratic requests for investigations of intelligence failures before the Iraq war, the Pentagon's handling of civilian contractors in Iraq, such as Halliburton Corp., and the role played by White House officials in leaks leading to the exposure of CIA officer Valerie Plame in a newspaper column.

During a recent House debate on the 2005 defense authorization bill, Republicans blocked a move by Waxman to set up a panel to investigate Abu Ghraib prison abuse in Iraq.

But there have been indications that the Bush administration's long honeymoon with Congress, which was extended when lawmakers in both parties rallied around the president in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, may be nearing an end.

Congressional assertiveness has ebbed and flowed in recent decades, often in step with the fortunes of presidents.

It was not until November 1973, when President Richard M. Nixon was reeling from Watergate-related disclosures and U.S. involvement in Vietnam was ending, that Congress reasserted prerogatives given up during the Vietnam War. It passed a joint resolution known as the War Powers Act, requiring regular consultation with Congress on contemplated military action, written notification within 48 hours of such action and other steps.