OVERNIGHT DEFENSE: House Syria vote expected Wednesday

THE TOPLINE: House leaders expect a vote Wednesday on a measure to give President Obama the authority to train and equip moderate Syrian rebels to fight the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

The proposal was offered as an amendment by House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) to a continuing resolution to fund the government through the fall.

{mosads}The measure drew criticism from the rank-and-file of both parties. GOP lawmakers suggested the measure might not pass without Democratic support, while House liberals are worried the Syria authorization draws the U.S. into another long, drawn-out overseas conflict.

Democratic leaders called a late afternoon conference to take the temperature of their caucus and shore up skeptical members of the president’s own party.

McKeon’s amendment also split Senate Democrats. Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the No. 2 Democratic leader, said the House resolution would need to be changed before he could support it, while Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) said he would vote against the legislation.

Yet others, like Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), predicted the chamber would ultimately approve the amendment. Senate Minority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) also endorsed the legislation.

If the full House approves the continuing resolution, and the Syria amendment, the Senate likely would take up the bill on Thursday.

COMBAT BOOTS ON THE GROUND? The White House and congressional Democrats played damage control after the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said on Tuesday that American combat troops could fight alongside Iraqi troops against ISIS.

“At this point his stated policy is that we will not have U.S. ground forces in direct combat,” Gen. Martin Dempsey said at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing. “But he has told me as well to come back to him on a case-by-case basis,” he said.

The White House immediately pushed back on those remarks. 

“He was referring to a hypothetical scenario in which there might be a future situation in which he might make a tactical recommendation to the President as it relates to the use of ground troops,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters.

He added that the president has “been very specific and precise about” not deploying “ground troops in a combat role into Iraq or Syria.” 

“The president is confident that this mission can be successfully executed without deploying American servicemen and women in a combat role on the ground in Iraq and Syria,” Earnest said. 

Several Democrats also denied that Dempsey meant putting U.S. troops in a direct combat role.

“Every military leader is going to say, if there’s a change in circumstances he’s gonna be open to a different recommendation. That doesn’t mean he suggested they may be needed,” Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told reporters after the hearing. 

“He suggested that if, in fact, they are needed in the future … he is open to making a different recommendation,” he added. 

Dempsey’s remarks came as the administration pressed lawmakers to back a measure authorizing the U.S. to train and arm Syrian rebels. Rank-and-file from both parties expressed concerns, with Republicans fearing that weapons could fall into the wrong hands and Democrats worried the U.S. was sliding into a new war.

“I’m very concerned by mission creep and by an open-ended commitment that would conceivably result in Americans having a combat role,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).

LAME-DUCK DEFENSE BILL? House and Senate lawmakers have begun informal discussions on putting together a 2015 defense policy bill so they can have it teed up when Congress returns for a lame-duck session.

The full House passed its version of the defense policy blueprint in May. The Senate Armed Services Committee unveiled its draft of the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that same month, but it has yet to reach the Senate floor.

“There’s informal discussions where all members can weigh in about what they like in the House bill and the Senate committee bill,” according to Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas), who could chair the House Armed Services Committee next year,

Members and their staffs will have anywhere from a month to six weeks to “hash through” any differences and “hopefully we can be in a position to have a … final NDAA voted on in a lame duck session,” he said.

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:

-McCain: ‘Has Rand Paul ever been to Syria?’

-Jindal to Congress: Back Obama on ISIS

-Pentagon rules target Hollywood leaks

-Lawmakers unveil bill to de-militarize cops

-Chelsea Manning: US can’t defeat ISIS with ‘bombs and bullets’

Please send tips and comments to Kristina Wong, kwong@digital-stage.thehill.com, and Martin Matishak, mmatishak@digital-stage.thehill.com.

Follow us on Twitter: @thehill, @kristina_wong, @martinmatishak