In the end, it was the writing on the wall that led the Democrats to break the impasse and rewrite the supplemental funding bill.

And that writing read: "You don't have the votes to override a presidential veto and force a troop withdrawal deadline."

And so any reference to a date for bringing troops home from this unpopular war was stripped from the measure financing that military engagement for the next four months.

Breaking the gridlock makes sense, and Hawai'i Sen. Daniel Inouye was key to that compromise. Congress also must progressively build the pressure for a positive change in course.

That won't be easy. What's left is the set of 18 benchmarks, requirements for incremental progress the White House and Pentagon will have to document in reports back to Capitol Hill.

Benchmarks haven't proven productive to this point. And left to his own devices, it would appear that President Bush resists change in his approach to the war.

For example, in a commencement speech at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, the president brought out two-year-old intelligence information linking Osama bin Laden to al-Qaeda operatives in Iraq. His critics, including intelligence experts outside the White House, dismissed the reports as another selective release of information blaming outside interference for Iraqi strife and ignoring the country's internal divisions.

This attitude does not bode well for initiatives aimed at a political solution through the Baghdad government.

But it does highlight the need for Congress to redouble its efforts at oversight of Iraq spending, making sure it's centered on building the country's security and compelling the government to acknowledge a need for a balance of powers.

It's a balance that our own administration should keep in mind as it pursues sensible foreign policy. Congress represents the people and has a role to play in seeing it carried out responsibly.