As President George Bush and a shrinking number of congressional allies cling to the Administration's "surge" strategy for Iraq, the American people have reached a different judgment.
 
It is time to change course.

According to a July 11-12 Newsweek Poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International, two out of every three Americans (64 percent) have concluded that the President's policy is a failure.

Only one out of eight Americans (13 percent) continues to share the President's view that we should "stay the course."

The Interim Report on Iraq - ordered by the Congress and released by the Administration last week - did little to challenge the public's assessment.   That official evaluation found "satisfactory progress" with respect to fewer than one-half of 18 critical benchmarks - including the Iraqis' failure to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces, enact legislation to fairly share oil revenues among all Iraqis, and spend $10 billion of their own money on reconstruction projects that will create new jobs.

It is hardly surprising, therefore, that more than two out of every five Americans (43 percent) now believe that we should begin the process of bringing our troops home - either immediately (19 percent of us) or by next spring at the latest (24 percent).

I should also note, however, that the Newsweek survey also found that 40 percent of the American public could accept a continued American military presence in Iraq - but only if the mission of our troops could be limited to fighting international terrorists and training Iraqi forces.

The Congress (and, especially, the Senate) reflects this same division of opinion, as reflected in last week's votes on Iraq.

The fundamental question now at the heart of our national debate about Iraq is whether America's interests are better served by an immediate withdrawal from Iraq or by a continuing, if more-focused, U.S. military presence.

Even those Americans who are prepared to give the U.S. military occupation more time to succeed or fail have now concluded that the Iraqi government and its security forces must take over responsibility for that nation's internal security.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki publicly declared last week that his forces are capable and that America's troops can leave Iraq "any time they want."

Some may disagree with the Prime Minister's assessment of his troops' readiness and loyalty - but his diplomatically worded invitation for U.S. troops to leave his country is an offer that we should take seriously.

The human and financial cost of this conflict has been appalling.

Untold numbers of Iraqi civilians have been killed.  The death toll in American lives now stands at more than 3,600.

The President's "surge" has increased the cost of war there and in Afghanistan to $12 billion a month - and the total American expenditure for Iraq alone now approaches $500 billion.

We must continue to work toward the construction of a new course in Iraq - refocusing our mission from combat to constructive diplomacy.  At the same time, we must begin the process of responsibly withdrawing our troops while maintaining non-military support for the duly elected government.

This is why I voted last week to support proposed legislation sponsored by Congressman Ike Skelton of Missouri, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee on which I serve, to begin the timely redeployment of our troops in Iraq.

By a vote of 223-201, the House passed and sent to the Senate the Responsible Re-Deployment from Iraq Act [H.R. 2956].   Our proposed legislation would require the withdrawal of most of the 160,000 American troops currently serving in Iraq within 120 days.

After April, 2008, our proposed legislation would permit continued engagement only by those American troops that are needed to chase down elements of the terrorist group, al Qaeda, defend the U.S. embassy, and train Iraqi forces.

At this point, it appears unlikely that our national division of opinion about how we should change course in Iraq will allow us to obtain the 60 votes we need to pass the measure in the Senate.  Even if we succeed there, the White House has indicated that President Bush would veto the measure - a peremptory response that suggests how difficult it will be to change course during the remainder of the Bush Administration.

I also have joined more than 50 of my House colleagues in cosponsoring H.R. 508, the Bring the Troops Home and Iraq Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2007, offered by Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey of California.  Candidly, we can expect President Bush to ignore the public will and stand in the way of this measure as well.

This presidential intransigence does not mean that we should abandon the national movement for a change in course.  Those of us who are convinced that our current policy is irreparably harming the security and moral standing of the United States will continue to fight for change.

We were elected to advance the collective wisdom of the American people - and we will persevere.