Congress’ frustration with the war in Iraq will come through loud and clear when the Senate Armed Services Committee begins writing its annual defense authorization bill on Tuesday.

Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers are expected to endorse a provision that would demand that the Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki foot more of the country’s reconstruction costs.

Defying President Bush, Democrats once again are likely to include language that would mandate a timeline for the withdrawal of most U.S. troops from Iraq. And in authorizing spending for a variety of weapons programs, the panel is expected to balance the war’s financial demands against investments in future military capabilities.

Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said he hopes the bill, which sets policy and authorizes spending for Pentagon programs and nuclear-weapons initiatives at the Energy Department, will pass the Senate by the end of May.

Four Armed Services subcommittees — Emerging Threats, Personnel, Seapower and Readiness — are scheduled to consider their portions of the bill behind closed doors Tuesday, with the remaining two subcommittees marking up their portions Wednesday, also in closed sessions.

The full committee markup is expected to start Wednesday and run to the end of the week, followed by open markups in the House Armed Services subcommittees during the week of May 5.

The Senate bill’s details were still being finalized, with most lawmakers and aides declining to discuss them. Still, some of the bill’s elements are taking shape.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are the first order of business. With the costs of the conflicts rising and the U.S. economy taking a downturn, members from both parties are increasingly talking about the need for the Iraqis, now awash in oil wealth, to spend more to help their country rebound.

Several members of the Senate Armed Services panel would like to shift the burden of funding Iraq’s reconstruction to the Maliki government. Several also want A-Iraqis to pay the U.S. military’s fuel costs, as well as the salaries of former Sunni insurgents who are now helping U.S. forces fight al Qaeda in Iraq.

Those senators, who include Democrats Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Evan Bayh of Indiana and Republican Susan Collins of Maine, would like to see U.S. funds for such purposes be provided to the Iraqis in the form of loans instead of grants.

Levin has proposed a more limited and direct approach, which would simply ban the obligation of U.S. funds for the reconstruction of Iraq. He hopes that such a provision either will be a part of the Senate Armed Services bill or appended to it on the Senate floor. “We’re looking for the right place to introduce the right language,” said Levin.

The legislation also could end up attached to the emergency war supplemental spending measure that the Senate is likely to take up in the coming weeks. Having the provision in both bills would increase its chances for enactment, in what Nelson called a “belt and suspenders” strategy.

In addition to requiring the Iraqis to pay more, Levin said his panel probably will weigh in on the Iraq War by recommending language that would require the withdrawal of most U.S. troops from Iraq. Such a proposal, probably a slightly modified version of withdrawal language offered last year by Levin and Jack Reed, D-R.I., also will be a part of the supplemental debate.

Yet Senate Democrats have repeatedly failed to enact legislation requiring troop withdrawals, and there is little reason to expect a different outcome this time.

On weaponry, the Senate Armed Services Committee was expected deviate from the Bush administration’s defense plans in several ways. Notably, the panel intends to restrict spending for a new antimissile site based in Europe, members and aides said, though the provision’s details were not yet set. Bush requested $720 million for the program in fiscal 2009.

“My sense is some people may try to cut funding, fence it or put some conditions on it,” said Joseph I. Lieberman, I-Conn.

Aides also said the panel could recommend a substantial cutback in at least one missile-defense program, the Airborne Laser, an initiative to mount a laser on a Boeing 747 airplane that could be used to shoot down enemy missiles. Bush has sought $400 million for the program.

Lieberman, chairman of Armed Services Airland Subcommittee, made clear he does not favor recommending a funding reduction to Bush’s roughly $3.3 billion request for the Army’s Future Combat Systems, in order to shift funds to meet today’s more pressing battlefield needs.

“It’s great stuff for our troops,” he said of the Future Combat Systems program. “It’s going to make them safer.”

The Senate Armed Services Committee is likely to reject a Bush administration proposal that would increase fees and deductibles for soldiers using the military’s Tricare health care system and another that would hike drug co-pays for Tricare beneficiaries. The Pentagon’s fiscal 2009 budget request assumes $1.2 billion in savings in anticipation of those fees.

The Senate panel is likely to include a non-military provision in its defense measure that would extend race-based hate-crime laws to people victimized by violence because of their gender, sexual orientation or disability, Levin and others said.

A similar provision was removed during the House-Senate defense authorization conference in 2007 and in 2004. House Democrats generally support the proposal but oppose its inclusion in the authorization bill because widespread GOP opposition could jeopardize the bill’s chances of enactment.

Josh Rogin contributed to this story. The Senate Armed Services Personnel Subcommittee markup begins at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday in 222 Russell; the Seapower Subcommittee markup begins at 2:30 p.m. in 222 Russell; the Readiness Subcommittee markup begins at 3 p.m. in 232-A Russell; and the Emerging Threats Subcommittee markup begins at 4 p.m. in 222 Russell.