The measure emerged from days of private talks among Democrats following the repudiation of Murtha's original proposal, which would have required the Pentagon to meet readiness and training standards without the possibility of a waiver.

Special coverage: Escalating Violence in Iraq  Related readings: 9 US soldiers killed in Iraq bombing 70 killed or injured in Baghdad bombing 28 killed in Baghdad suicide bombing US, Iraqi forces enter Shiite center 14 seized Iraqi police found slain

Murtha said its implementation would have starved the war effort of troops because the Pentagon could not find enough units to meet the standards.

Several moderate Democrats spoke out against it, though. And Republicans sharply attacked it as the abandonment of troops already in the war zone.

Pelosi and the leadership have struggled in recent days to craft legislation that could satisfy liberals reluctant to vote for continued funding of the war, as well as conservative lawmakers unwilling to be seen as tying the hands of military commanders in a time of war.

Several strong opponents of the war issued a statement during the evening saying they "have had a constructive dialogue with members of our party's leadership. ... However, at this time, we have not reached any final agreement."

The statement said members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus would go ahead with plans to outline legislation that would allow war funds to be used only for the withdrawal of troops and other limited objectives.

The statement was issued in the name of Reps. Lynn Woolsey , Barbara Lee and Diane Watson of California; Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York, Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas and Rep. Keith Ellison of Minnesota.

Democrats have also said in recent days they would add money to Bush's request for military operations in Afghanistan, where the Taliban is expected to mount a spring offensive, as well as for veterans' health and medical programs for active duty troops at the scandal-scarred Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington.

1

2