Pelosi and other Democratic leaders have struggled in recent days to come up with an approach on the war that would satisfy liberals reluctant to vote for continued funding without driving away more moderate Democrats unwilling to be seen as tying the hands of military commanders.

Democratic aides said their greatest concern was persuading liberals to come aboard, and they were hoping anti-war organizations would come out in favor of the House measure.

Liberal Rep. Maxine Waters of California said she told Pelosi she intended to vote no, and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas said she "would have a very difficult time" supporting it.

At the same time, Rep. Dennis Cardoza of California said a meeting of moderate and conservative Democrats produced strong expressions of support. "I think that this legislation gives the generals adequate flexibility to do what they need to do on the ground," he said. "At the same time it gives a certain finality that is being demanded by the American people."

Officials said a Wednesday night meeting of first-term Democrats produced little opposition. "For me it supports the troops, supports the veterans and holds the president accountable," said Rep. Ed Perlmutter of Colorado.

Democrats can afford only 15 defections and still be assured of passing their legislation in the House. Few Republicans are expected to vote in favor.

Seeking support, the leadership added $1.2 billion to Bush's request for military operations in Afghanistan and $3.5 billion for veterans' health care and medical programs at facilities such as the recently criticized Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington.

Domestic spending would rise $12 billion over the administration's request - and there apparently were no plans to offset the spending to prevent increases in the deficit.

Searching for votes elsewhere, Pelosi signaled she was considering adding a House-passed minimum wage increase to the military spending bill, along with $1.3 billion in tax cuts that cleared earlier in the year.

A provision to require Bush to get authorization from Congress to take major military action against Iraq ran into turbulence from lawmakers concerned about the implications for Israel.

As described by Democrats, the legislation would require Bush to certify by July 1 and again by Oct. 1 whether the Iraqi government was making progress toward providing for the country's security, allocating its oil revenues and creating a fair system for amending its constitution.

If Bush certified the Iraqis were meeting these benchmarks, U.S. combat troops would have to begin withdrawing by March 1, 2008, and complete the redeployment by Sept. 1.

Otherwise, the deadlines would move up.

If Bush cannot make either certification, the law requires a six-month withdrawal to begin immediately.

The legislation also requires the Pentagon to adhere to its existing standards for equipping and training U.S. troops sent overseas and for providing time at home between tours of combat. Bush would have authority to waive these standards, though, meaning they could not be used to prevent the buildup of troops in Baghdad that the president ordered in January.

1

2