Top Republican and Democratic leaders backed Obama’s plan seven weeks before midterm elections, while dozens of rank-and-file lawmakers in both parties opposed it
The Republican-controlled House voted grudgingly to give the administration authority to train and arm Syrian rebels on Wednesday as President Barack Obama emphasised anew that American forces “do not and will not have a combat mission” in the struggle against Islamic State militants in either Iraq or Syria.
The 273-156 vote crossed party lines to an unusual degree in a Congress marked by near ceaseless partisanship.
Top Republican and Democratic leaders backed Obama’s plan seven weeks before midterm elections, while dozens of rank-and-file lawmakers in both parties opposed it.
The provision was added to spending legislation that will ensure the federal government operates normally after the Sept. 30 end of the budget year.
Final approval is expected in the Senate as early as Thursday.
Even supporters of the military plan found little to trumpet. “This is the best of a long list of bad options,” said Rep Jim Moran. One Republican supporter noted the measure includes strict limits on Obama’s authority.
“Members on both sides of the aisle are very concerned that too much of Congress’ war making power has gone to the president,” said Rep Tom Cole of Oklahoma.
Obama’s remarks and similar comments Wednesday by House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi seemed designed to reassure liberal lawmakers that the new military mission would be limited.
In a statement following the vote, Obama said the House “took an important step forward as our nation unites to confront the threat posed” by the Islamic State group, showing bipartisan support for a “critical component” of his strategy against the extremists.
Only a day earlier, Gen Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, drew widespread attention when he told Congress he might recommend the use of US ground combat forces if Obama’s current strategy fails to stop the militants.
Across the political aisle from the president and Pelosi, Speaker John Boehner and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California swung behind the plan.
Yet many other Republicans expressed concerns that it would be insufficient to defeat militants who have overrun parts of Syria and Iraq and beheaded two American journalists.
In all, 85 Democrats and 71 Republicans voted to deny Obama the authority he sought.
The measure passed on the strength of 159 votes from Republicans and 114 from Democrats.
Republican lawmakers took solace in the short-term nature of the legislation.
It grants Obama authority only until Dec 11, giving Congress plenty of time to return to the issue in a postelection session set to begin in mid-November.
While the military provision was given a separate vote in the House, to tack it onto the spending bill, it seemed unlikely there would be a yes-or-no vote in the Senate on Obama’s new military strategy to train rebel forces in Saudi Arabia to be used in conjunction with potential US airstrikes.
Instead, the Senate is likely to vote only once on the legislation that combines approval for arming and training rebels with the no-shutdown federal spending provisions.
Officials put a $500 million price tag on Obama’s request to train and equip rebels.
The cost generated virtually no discussion among lawmakers, who focused instead on the possible consequences of a new military mission not long after America ended participation in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
