Bush's Iraq Plan Meets Skepticism On Capitol Hill

Gates also announced that he is recommending an increase in the size of the Marine Corps and Army by 92,000 troops over the next five years, and he joined other administration officials in offering new warnings about the power of Iran. He said one consequence of a failed U.S. effort in Iraq would be "an emboldened and strengthened Iran."

Former secretary of state James A. Baker III and former congressman Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.), co-chairmen of the Iraq Study Group, issued a statement last night in which they raised questions about the "nature of the surge" and urged the president to further consider other recommendations in the group's report, including conditioning support for the Iraqi government on its meeting of benchmarks, creating an international support group for Iraq and beginning a transition that could enable U.S. forces to begin to leave.

In addition to the new security plan, Bush also called Wednesday for additional funds for economic reconstruction, and like the Iraq Study Group, for political benchmarks for the Iraqi government -- such as a new oil law and provincial elections. But unlike the study group, Bush would impose no penalties on the Iraqis for lack of compliance.

The White House is running the risk that the widespread discontent on Capitol Hill will mushroom into an embarrassing resolution disapproving the president's plan or, worse, the imposition of limitations on funding for the war. White House aides said they fully expected criticism from many quarters, but they expressed disappointment that, as they saw it, many lawmakers do not appear to be giving the new strategy more than a cursory review. More than 130 lawmakers trooped to the White House for personal briefings from the president in recent days -- but to little apparent effect.

Still, White House counselor Dan Bartlett expressed optimism that a showdown with Congress over funding can be avoided, despite a vow by some House Democratic leaders to try to derail funding for the additional troops. "It appears the Democrats are divided on that issue themselves," he said. "We obviously hope it doesn't get to that point -- and my personal opinion is I don't think it will."

Bartlett added that critics should do more than take shots at Bush's plan. "We do believe that those who have decided to reject this plan before it has an opportunity to work have a greater responsibility to propose something that will work," he said. "We have yet to see that from Democrats."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) vowed to filibuster Democratic efforts to bring to a vote a resolution disapproving the policy, but opponents of the plan may be able to muster the 60 votes needed to break his parliamentary obstacle. Half a dozen Senate Republicans have come out against sending more troops to Iraq, with at least four others expressing skepticism. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) predicted that the resolution would pick up 12 GOP votes, a count McConnell did not dispute.

Across Capitol Hill yesterday, the administration also found the going rough. At the House Armed Services Committee, Gates and Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, were questioned extensively about the timing of the "surge" in troops, with several committee members from both parties questioning the level of commitment from the Iraqi government.

A House Republican letter to Bush opposing any increase in troop strength garnered nine signatures. Meanwhile, Democratic leaders said they will push a resolution on support for the president's proposal, and House Republicans said Bush risks a major defeat. For Republicans who narrowly escaped defeat in November, the coming vote could be a nightmare, they said.

"The White House will have to work 24 hours a day to find people on our side who aren't going to jump ship," said Rep. Ray LaHood (R-Ill.). "This is a real serious dilemma for members in difficult seats. The next election will be about the White House, not the House. We will rise or fall on our nominee and how this war is going."

Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) said he "would not say there are a lot of enthusiastic members over here" in support of the president. "I have zero comfort level with escalating this," he said.

Staff writers Jon Cohen, Glenn Kessler, Peter Baker, Josh White, Lyndsey Layton and Lori Montgomery contributed to this report.