Democrats Split Over Timetable For Troops

Unlike many Democrats running for House seats, Connecticut's Chris Murphy, with Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, supports withdrawal of Guardsmen. (By Jessica Hill -- Associated Press)

Murphy said his refusal to call for an immediate end to the war does not satisfy many of the antiwar Democrats in his state who helped Ned Lamont defeat Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman in the recent Democratic primary. "There are many more people in this district who want us out of Iraq," he said.

In many ways, Democratic candidates' reluctance to call for the withdrawal of troops reflects the public's uncertainty over how best to proceed.

The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, a nonpartisan polling organization, found this month that the public is evenly split over pulling out U.S. troops, with 48 percent in favor of keeping troops in Iraq and 46 percent in favor of withdrawal. Yet even among those who favor bringing U.S. troops home, only a third support doing so immediately. Asked another way, 52 percent of those polled said they would favor setting a timetable for getting out, while 41 percent would oppose that.

Most Republican incumbents and challengers in tight races are backing Bush in maintaining current U.S. troop levels until a sufficient number of Iraqi soldiers are trained and the new government is running more effectively.

A substantial number of GOP candidates are critical of the military's management of the conflict, but only a few have called for a major changes in strategy or a shakeup in the military.

"I think we need to put a new plan in place in Iraq," said Rick O'Donnell, the Republican candidate in Colorado's open 7th District. "I share the growing sense of trying to bring our troops home as quickly as we can, but we have got to do so in a way that does not leave a failed state."

Shays, who has defended the Bush approach throughout his campaign, this week returned from his 14th visit to Iraq and vowed to detail a timeline for withdrawing most U.S. troops next year. Shays appears to be embracing a position that Bush warned last week would weaken the country and embolden terrorists. GOP leaders are watching closely to see if other Republicans follow suit.

In many races, including the Shays-Farrell showdown, the candidates are offering similar messages in addressing concerns about the war.

In southeastern Virginia, for instance, Phil Kellam, the Democratic challenger to GOP Rep. Thelma D. Drake, sounds like a typical GOP candidate when discussing the war. "I believe we need to win there," said Kellam, who rejects timetables and a quick withdrawal. "We must fight terrorism and spread democracy throughout the world. Congress must stop playing partisan politics and honor its responsibility to our troops."

In Montana, home to one of the most competitive Senate races in the country, Democratic candidate Jon Tester has rejected calls for a timeline. But unlike the incumbent, Sen. Conrad Burns (R), Tester is harshly critical of the current Bush approach.

"I'm saying: Develop a plan to move the troops out of Iraq," Tester said. "That's a whole lot different than saying: Stay the course and be there forever." No Republican is advocating that the United States maintain high troop levels indefinitely.

Some Democrats, including Rep. John P. Murtha (Pa.), a former Marine, have called for a redeployment of troops in Iraq beginning this year. "There is no date that is too soon for me," said Nancy Nusbaum, the Democratic challenger in northeast Wisconsin's open 8th District.

But many Democratic candidates are wary of going too far in challenging Bush's policies, fearing that voters might heed the president's warning last week that "leaving before the job was done would be a disaster" for Iraq and the region.

Few Democrats are saying "get out now," as Bush suggested they were, and even most of the harshest war critics are opposed to cutting off funding for U.S. troops.

Democratic candidate Heath Shuler -- the former Redskins quarterback challenging Republican Rep. Charles H. Taylor in North Carolina's 11th District -- "does not believe an immediate withdrawal would be a good idea . . . because of the political vacuum it would create," said Andrew Whalen, a spokesman for the Shuler campaign. "He would support funding because we have to support our troops." Taylor agrees.

Democratic leaders in Congress who are intensifying criticism of the Bush war policy are generally opposed to dictating specific reductions in troop levels, too. Before the August recess, the top Democratic leaders and ranking members on national security committees agreed to a plan to begin redeploying some troops at year's end. But they stopped short of setting goals or outlining retaliatory steps they would take if Bush fails to draw down forces.

For instance, if Democrats wanted to take a hard line with Bush, they could threaten to hold up funding for military operations or take other steps to try to force the president's hand. There are no plans to do so.

"That is clearly the conundrum," said Michael Arcuri, the Democratic candidate in New York's wide-open 24th District. Although he supports bringing some troops home now and all of them by the end of 2007, Arcuri said, "I don't think we could ever, at any point, cut funding" for the military operation to exert pressure.