LOCAL LAWMAKERS DIVIDED ALONG PARTY LINES ON SURGE.

Byline: LISA FRIEDMAN

Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- Southern California lawmakers split along party lines Tuesday as Congress opened debate on the Iraq War and a Democratic resolution opposing President George W. Bush's plan to add more than 21,500 troops to the effort.

But many local families most closely touched by the war said they are torn over the proposed troop increase and what Congress' response should be.

"If the troops get extra help, great," said Carolyn Steinbacher of La Crescenta whose 22-year-old son, Nicholas, an Army specialist, was killed last December by a roadside bomb in Iraq.

But, Steinbacher added, "If you send more troops, you put families in the situation that I'm in -- the loss of a child. We're caught between the fire and the frying pan."

Emmy Aprahamian, whose 35-year-old daughter, Army Spc. Carla Babayan Stewart, died earlier this month in Iraq, said she doesn't feel it is her place to decide what direction the war should take.

"I don't know who's right and who's wrong," Aprahamian said. "I don't want to say, 'No, we don't need more troops.' What if our troops need them?"

But local lawmakers generally came down strongly along party lines, with Republicans accusing their political rivals of sending a disheartening message and offering no alternative.

"The impact that it has on troops is a great concern," said Rep. Elton Gallegly, R-Thousand Oaks. "Is there not a contradiction when you say 'We support our troops,' and the way we support them in the next breath is not to give them reinforcement?"

Added Rep. David Dreier, R-Glendora: "It tries to shroud their lack of support in our troops with platitudes. You cannot claim to support our troops without supporting their mission."

While some Republicans like Dreier and Gallegly expressed support for the troop increase, other GOP lawmakers avoided the topic altogether and instead focused on attacking the resolution as harmful to morale.

"(There are) some serious doubts about the military strategy, but this resolution is silliness," said James Geoffrey, a spokesman for Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Santa Clarita. "You're sending troops into battle with one house of the Congress saying, 'We support you; we just don't support what you're doing.' That's not helpful."

Democrats, meanwhile, stood their ground in opposition.

"The current situation in Iraq proves what we've been saying all along. The Iraq war has not and will not make America safer," said Rep. Joe Baca, D-San Bernardino.

"I'm going to strongly support the House resolution," added Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Pasadena, who voted in favor of the 2003 invasion, but feels that increasing troop levels is the wrong direction.

Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Sherman Oaks, said he will vote for the resolution because "the surge is a mistake.

"We've tried it four or five times already," Sherman said. He also took issue with GOP allegations that Democrats have no alternative.

"Nobody has a plan that gets you a great result," he said. "We don't and they don't. We have followed this president into a bad situation."

Schiff said he does not believe that troops in Iraq see the resolution as an abandonment of U.S. support.

"The troops are very sophisticated about what's going on back home. Many of them also have mixed feelings about the direction of the war, just as the American public does," he said.

But Ed Blecksmith of San Marino -- whose 22-year-old son J.P., a U.S. Marine, died in Iraq during the 2004 battle of Fallujah -- said he is convinced the resolution undermines troop morale and the cause behind his son's death.

"I don't like what Congress is doing. They're playing rather frivolously with the lives of our troops over there," Blecksmith said. "If we pull out now, then J.P. will have died in vain."

lisa.friedman(at)langnews.com

[phone]