EDITORIAL
Senators wisely avoid a military blank check

"The defense of our nation is too important to be a matter of partisan politics," intoned Hawai'i Sen. Dan Inouye after the Senate passed its version of defense spending by an overwhelmingly bipartisan 95-3 vote.

That doesn't mean this legislation, like the similar House companion bill, is altogether wise.

It endorses some plans for fighting the last war instead of the next one, spending for weapons systems and facilities the Pentagon no longer wants.

But the Senate and the House so far have both refused to give President Bush an important item on his wish list: a $10 billion contingency fund that he says would allow him more quickly to implement his war on terrorism.

At this point, it's unclear exactly where this war is headed. The American role in Afghanistan is largely complete, although the resources devoted by our allies appear insufficient to enable that ravaged country to get back on its feet. The training mission in the Philippines is also done, although claims that the Abu Sayyaf rebels have been pushed off Basilan neglect to say where they've gone and what threat they'll present when they regroup. And the debate is just beginning on how and whether to include Iraq in these plans.

So the lawmakers have wisely decided this is no time to waive their constitutional oversight responsibility and give the White House a blank check.