NY Times misrepresented Feingold proposal on Iraq redeployment

Written by Ben Armbruster

Published

A New York Times article stated that a “proposal[]” by Sen. Russ Feingold “would require most American troops to be pulled out of Iraq by next June and would then cut financing for continuing military operations.” In fact, Feingold's proposal would not have “cut financing” for U.S. troops remaining in Iraq; it provides funding for several “continuing military operations” in Iraq after the redeployment.

Reporting that Senate Republicans had filibustered an amendment sponsored by Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) stipulating that U.S. troops' time at home should be equal to the time they spent overseas before being redeployed, a September 20 New York Times article misrepresented a separate proposal by Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) mandating that U.S. combat forces redeploy from Iraq by June 30, 2008. According to the Times, a “proposal[]” by Feingold “would require most American troops to be pulled out of Iraq by next June and would then cut financing for continuing military operations,” a reference to an amendment Feingold proposed to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. In fact, Feingold's proposal would not have “cut financing” for U.S. troops remaining in Iraq after most troops are withdrawn. Rather, it provided funding for the following “continuing military operations” in Iraq:

  • [C]onduct[ing] targeted operations, limited in duration and scope, against members of al Qaeda and affiliated international terrorist organizations.
  • [P]rovid[ing] security for United States Government personnel and infrastructure.
  • [P]rovid[ing] training to members of the Iraqi Security Forces who have not been involved in sectarian violence or in attacks upon the United States Armed Forces, provided that such training does not involve members of the United States Armed Forces taking part in combat operations or being embedded with Iraqi forces.
  • [P]rovid[ing] training, equipment, or other materiel to members of the United States Armed Forces to ensure, maintain, or improve their safety and security.

On September 20, the Senate defeated Feingold's measure, 70-28, with two senators not voting.

From the Times article:

Democrats said Mr. Webb's proposal, if approved, would have added time between deployments, forced the withdrawal of troops on a substantially swifter timeline and, they said, protect troops from serving protracted and debilitating deployments.

On Thursday and Friday, the Senate is expected to vote on several other war proposals by the Democrats, including one by Senator Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, that would require most American troops to be pulled out of Iraq by next June and would then cut financing for continuing military operations.

Another proposal by Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, would require a shift of American troops away from combat by next summer. Mr. [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid's [NV] spokesman said the decision to stick with a hard deadline for withdrawal was endorsed by Mr. Levin, who earlier had signaled a willingness to soften his proposal to win Republican converts.

Neither the Feingold plan nor the Levin initiative has much chance of winning 60 votes.