On Friday, the United States Senate passed the 2008 Fiscal Year National Defense Authorization Act. The bill provides $696.4 billion in funding for the United States military (and a few other programs), covering everything from pay raises for soldiers to ongoing military operations. In the House, Grand Rapids Representative Vern Ehlers voted in favor of the bill while in the Senate both Michigan Senators Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow voted in favor of the bill in a 93-0 vote.

Despite Congressional Democrats' declared opposition to the ongoing Iraq War, the overwhelming majority of them supported the National Defense Authorization even though it calls for spending $189.5 billion on the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. While the Democrats have received considerable media attention for their efforts seeking timeframes for withdrawal, this legislation contained no such timeframe and essentially called for the money to be provided unconditionally. The money must still be appropriated and Democrats do ostensibly have the option of controlling when and how the money is appropriated, but given that they have already approved the general idea of spending the $189 billion, it is hard to see how they could succeed in withholding those funds. Essentially, the Democrats have put themselves in the same position that they were in earlier this spring when they said that they would fund the troops no matter what, effectively undercutting their negotiating position.

Senator Levin--who has positioned himself as a leading Democratic "opponent" of the Iraq War--said of that despite the vote without a timeframe for withdrawal, "The effort to change course in Iraq is not over." Still, Levin has admitted that he does not know how to move forward and affect Iraq policy. He has been quoted saying "We have tried a number of ways to put into law that you must begin to reduce our troops" and that "The question is how do you get to 60 to overcome the Republican filibuster? That is what our goal will continue to be." Senator Levin and the Democrats continue to frame the debate in terms of crafting legislation that will get the 60 votes necessary to overcome a filibuster, when in reality, any Democrat could filibuster an Iraq spending measure and effectively withhold funds for the war and force the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Thus far, none of the Democratic leadership is willing to consider that option. Instead, they appear to be content to let the war drag on and--particularly in the case of Levin--blaming Iraqis for the ongoing occupation.

The bill also contains what is routinely unquestioned annual spending for the military. Each year, as much as 51% of the annual budget goes towards military spending (ranging from 21% to 51% depending on how the percentages are calculated). The annual bills--as they do this year--typically include substantial funding for future weapons systems ranging from fighter jets to nuclear weapons. Overall, military spending by the United States accounts for 50% military expenditures worldwide.
Once again, Senators running for president skipped the vote. This includes the Democratic candidates--many of whom are campaigning on their so-called opposition to the Iraq War.