Dennis Cook, Associated Press Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., center, celebrates with Rep. Patrick Murphy, D-Pa., left, and Rep. Tim Walz, D-Minn. on Capitol Hill in Washington, yesterday after a sharply divided House of Representatives voted to order President Bush to bring combat troops home from Iraq next year. Both Murphy and Walz are Iraq War veterans. Click photo for larger image.
	Dennis Cook, Associated Press House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., left, and Rep. Murphy take part in a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington after the House vote yesterday. Click photo for larger image. More on the story The Freshman Class: Rep. Jason Altmire blogs about the House action and his own vote House roll call on spending bill
	Pablo Martinez Monsivais, Associated Press President Bush speaks in the Diplomatic Room of the White House in Washington, yesterday, on the Iraq War Emergency Supplemental. Behind the president are members of various veterans organizations. Click photo for larger image.

WASHINGTON -- House Democrats narrowly won approval yesterday of a deadline for removing hundreds of thousands of troops from Iraq, setting March 1, 2008, as the latest date to begin the pullout.

President Bush said the deadline, which was attached to a $124 billion emergency spending bill for the war, has "no chance of becoming law," and Senate Republicans promised to block it.

Fourteen Democrats and all but two Republicans in the House voted against the bill, with Democratic leaders managing to minimize defections among the party's most liberal members, who want an immediate end to the war. The final vote was 218-212.

"We are going to start bringing the troops home. We're going to change the direction of this country," Pennsylvania's Rep. John Murtha, D-Johnstown, said from the House floor just before the vote.

As chairman of the powerful House panel on defense spending, Mr. Murtha worked closely with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other top Democrats to devise a bill that could keep together the party's fractious majority. They included billions of dollars in funding for programs unrelated to the war, such as agricultural aid and money for children's health insurance, and assured wavering members that the bill represented the best chance to start withdrawing troops.

When the votes were counted, Democrats erupted in applause, and Mr. Murtha hugged fellow lawmakers.

The White House response was swift:

"Democrats in the House, in an act of political theater, voted to substitute their judgment for that of our military commanders on the ground in Iraq," President Bush said from the Diplomatic Reception Room. "They set an arbitrary date for withdrawal without regard for conditions on the ground. And they tacked on billions for pet projects that have nothing to do with winning the war on terror. ...

"As I have made clear for weeks, I will veto it if it comes to my desk. And because the vote in the House was so close, it is clear that my veto would be sustained.

"The secretary of defense has warned that if Congress does not approve the emergency funding for our troops by April 15, our men and women in uniform will face significant disruptions, and so would their families. ... Congress needs to send me a clean bill that I can sign without delay."

The House legislation calls for a redeployment of all U.S. forces in Iraq by August of next year. But a pullout could begin sooner if the Iraqi government fails to meet a series of benchmarks, including a program to disarm sectarian militias. By July 1, Mr. Bush must certify that Iraqis are moving toward those goals.

"I keep hearing people say we've got to give this [troop surge] a chance. For four years we've given them a chance. For four years we've had our troops overseas," Mr. Murtha said.

One of his top priorities was inserting into the legislation readiness requirements for military units: strict training and equipment levels for troops before they head overseas; at least one year of rest between deployments; and an end to the military's "stop-loss" policies that prevent soldiers from leaving the service when their enlistment periods end. The president can request a waiver to bypass the requirements.

House Democrats added more than $21 billion to the president's funding request, including an extra $1.7 billion for veterans' health care, $2.3 billion for an increase in the size of the military and $1 billion for Afghanistan, which Democrats call the front in the war on terrorism.

Western Pennsylvania lawmakers split along partisan lines in yesterday's vote. Rep. Mike Doyle, D-Forest Hills, and Rep. Jason Altmire, D-McCandless, joined Mr. Murtha in backing the bill, while four Republicans -- Tim Murphy of Upper St. Clair, Phil English of Erie, John Peterson of Venango and Bill Shuster of Blair -- voted against it.

"A vote against this bill is a vote against supplying our troops with the funding and resources they need while they are in the field of battle," Mr. Altmire said.

The freshman legislator had expressed reservations about a withdrawal deadline, but he said the United States needs "leverage" in pushing the Iraqis to take more responsibility for the war.

The National Republican Congressional Committee accused Mr. Altmire of "waving the white flag of surrender."

"The benchmarks I see in this bill are intended to bring about failure," said Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. "Just think for a moment what signal this sends to our enemy."

"I don't know why the gentleman [Murtha] from Pennsylvania put forward his plan even though he is not the commander in chief," said Rep. Dave Weldon, R-Fla.

Mr. Weldon scoffed at the bill's legislative "pork," including $74 million for peanut storage costs and $25 million to help spinach farmers hurt by last year's E. coli outbreak. "My constituents are asking, 'Who put that in the bill -- Popeye?' "

Mr. Murphy also said the bill was weighted down with unnecessary funding. "I think the people in Pennsylvania will see right through it," the Upper St. Clair Republican said. "In the end, this was not a bipartisan discussion on how to approach the war."

A Senate version of the war spending bill calls for a troop withdrawal to be under way 120 days after the measure becomes law. It likely will come up for a vote next week and faces significant obstacles because of that chamber's one-seat Democratic majority.

"We will block this on the floor of the Senate," said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. "The American people will resoundingly reject this micromanaging of the commander in chief."

Senators voted against a similar Iraq deadline earlier this month.