The Senate yesterday passed its fiscal 2007 war spending bill 51 to 47. Democrats will try to get through the conference quickly, but they have to iron out several differences between the two chambers’ bills.

The pressure will be on to get something to the president soon so the veto showdown can begin. At the moment, Democrats and the president are portraying each other as being unreasonable on withdrawal language included in both bills. On the supplemental, House Defense Appropriations chief Murtha said they hope to have the conference done around April 26. The president requested $103 billion and the House version would provide $124.3 billion, while the Senate total is $123.2 billion.

Most important for conferees is the difference over withdrawal language. The difference is slight but the vote wiggle room is so small in both chambers that the compromise language could change enough votes to jeopardize passage. The House language requires the president to certify the Iraqi government is meeting certain benchmarks and bases the withdrawal timetable on their ability to do so. Even if they meet all the benchmarks, the House bill sets a date of August 2008 for most troops to be out of Iraq. The Senate bill calls for troops to begin leaving within 120 days of enactment, but it sets a “goal” of having them home by March 31, 2008. It’s the “goal” language that is considered less firm than the House deadline. Regardless, the president has threatened to veto any such language.

In yesterday’s action, the Senate adopted an amendment by Democrat Biden that adds $1.5 billion to the bill for mine resistant vehicles. Also adopted was an amendment by Republican Lugar that sets aside $50 million for the civilian reserve corps teams the president highlighted in his State of the Union address. The House bill contains the same amount.

Earmark foes scored one victory and chalked up one defeat for the day. The Senate agreed by unanimous consent to strike a provision from the bill that would have redirected $2 million in already appropriated funds to the University of Vermont for the “Educational Excellence Program.” Republican Coburn offered the amendment. But Democrats objected when DeMint, R-S.C., sought unanimous consent to make the earmark disclosure requirements included in the lobbying bill passed earlier this year part of the Senate’s rules. That would have put them into affect immediately.