After much anticipation, Senate Republicans blocked debate [3] early Monday evening on a bill opposing President Bush’s plan to escalate U.S. troop levels in Iraq. Sixty votes were required to bring it to the floor, and ultimately the motion to invoke cloture fell eleven short, 49-47. Two Republicans, Norm Coleman [4] (Minn.) and Susan Collins [5] (Maine), both up for reelection in 2008, crossed party lines and voted to open debate, while Sen. Joe Lieberman [6] (I-Conn.) joined most Republicans in blocking it. Majority Leader Harry Reid [7] (D-Nev.) also voted against debate once it became clear that the measure would fail, a procedural move that will provide him the option of revisiting the matter in the future.

The bill, sponsored by Senate Armed Services Committee [8] Chair Carl Levin [9] (D-Mich.), was intended to serve as a starting point for debate on measures concerning the proposed troop "surge." It expresses that the, "Senate disagrees with the 'plan' to augment our forces by 21,500, and urges the President instead to consider all options and alternatives." In addition, it calls for President Bush to submit a progress report to Congress every thirty days until all combat brigades have left Iraq. The bill's failure became inevitable after Democratic and Republican Senate leaders could not agree on which of several existing Iraq resolutions would be debated on the floor, and the way in which they would be considered. The following three resolutions played a central role in the impasse:

• Warner-Levin [3] resolution: Would put the Senate on record as opposing the troop "surge" and call for increased diplomatic efforts to settle the conflict. In addition, it would state that Congress should oppose "the elimination or reduction of funds for troops in the field, as such an action with respect to funding would undermine their safety or harm their effectiveness in pursuing their assigned missions." (This resolution is almost identical to the Levin bill; the primary difference is the call for a monthly progress report included in the bill).
• McCain-Graham-Lieberman [10] resolution: Would set eleven conditions that the Iraqi government would need to meet in order to retain American support. In addition, it would express that the president and all personnel serving under him should "receive from Congress the full support necessary to carry out the United States mission in Iraq."
• Gregg [11] resolution: Would recognize the power of the president to deploy troops and the "responsibility" of Congress to provide funds for them. Finally, it would add that, "Congress should not take any action that will endanger United States military forces in the field, including the elimination or reduction of funds."

Before any floor action took place, Majority Leader Harry Reid [7] (D-Nev.) offered Minority Leader Mitch McConnell [12] (R-Ky.) a choice. Either all three resolutions could come to a vote, with a simple majority needed for passing any of them, or a debate and vote would be held only on the Warner-Levin and McCain-Graham-Lieberman resolutions, with each requiring sixty votes to pass. McConnell, however, wanted all three resolutions to face a sixty-vote requirement, likely because it was believed only the Gregg measure could reach this threshold. In the end, the two sides could not reach an agreement, leading to a Republican filibuster of the Levin bill and a halt (at least for the day) to debate on Iraq.

Following the vote, Reid promised that Democrats would pursue the issue again, stating, "You can run but you cannot hide...We are going to debate Iraq." McConnell downplayed the vote as a mere procedural hurdle, calling it a "bump in the road" and adding, "We are ready and anxious to have this debate this week."

Congresspedia [13] has been closely monitoring congressional actions regarding the proposed troop "surge" in Iraq [14]. Stay tuned for updates and feel free to edit the page yourself as new details emerge.