A loss on Syria would have serious reverberations throughout the next three months. Obama could lose big on Syria plan

If the House voted today on a resolution to attack Syria, President Barack Obama would lose — and lose big.

That’s the private assessment of House Republican and Democratic lawmakers and aides who are closely involved in the process.


If the Senate passes a use-of-force resolution next week — which is no sure thing — the current dynamics suggest that the House would defeat it. That would represent a dramatic failure for Obama, and once again prove that his sway over Congress is extraordinarily limited. The loss would have serious reverberations throughout the next three months, when Obama faces off against Congress in a series of high-stakes fiscal battles.

( VIDEO: VandeHei, Allen analysis on Syria situation)

Several Republican leadership aides, who are counting votes but not encouraging a position, say that there are roughly one to two dozen “yes” votes in favor of military action at this time. The stunningly low number is expected to grow a bit.

But senior aides say they expect, at most, between 50 and 60 Republicans to vote with Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), who support the president’s plan to bomb Syria to stop Bashar Assad from using chemical weapons on his people. That would amount to less than one-third of the House Republican Conference.

That would mean the vast majority of the 200 House Democrats will need to vote with Obama for the resolution to pass. But Democrats privately say that Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) can only round up between 115 and 130 “yes” votes.

( Also on POLITICO: Pelosi enforcers wobble on Syria)

High-level congressional sources believe there is some time — but not much — for Obama, Boehner and Pelosi to turn things around. But any vote to authorize an attack on Syria will be extraordinarily close, according to people in both parties with direct knowledge of the political dynamics in the House Republican Conference and Democratic Caucus.

Boehner and Cantor back the president’s plan for “limited, proportional” strikes in Syria. Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) is not convinced it’s the right decision. McCarthy’s calculus seems to be more in line with many House Republicans — he has spoken to many of his allies in the last week, and the support for a U.S. strike on Syria is incredibly low, sources familiar with those discussions says say.

House leaders plan to takes up the Syria resolution only if it passes the Senate first .

( PHOTOS: Syria: Where politicians stand)

The political climate, of course, can change. Pelosi is a legendary whip and has an uncanny ability to move her members. Since Congress is not in session, many lawmakers haven’t been lobbied by the Obama administration or attended its classified briefings. Obama hasn’t taken to the Oval Office to address the nation about Syria — many hope he’ll do that when he returns from the G-20 in Russia. The White House has already canceled a planned presidential trip to Los Angeles on Monday so the president can lobby lawmakers.

And rank-and-file House Republicans — especially some key members — are holding back their positions, waiting to see what happens next week when Congress returns.

“Republicans have traditionally tended to break toward the president” on national security and defense issues, noted a senior GOP aide. But this aide estimated that the resolution to bomb Syria has only a “30 to 40 percent chance of passing right now.”

( Also on POLITICO: So far, President Obama’s political arm sits out Syria push)

POLITICO reported on Thursday that Obama administration officials have reached out directly to one-third of Congress in the last two weeks — at least 60 senators and 125 House members — with more contacts to come, according to a White House aide.

And AIPAC, the powerful pro-Israel lobbying group, is poised to mount a major blitz next week in support of the Syria resolution, officials with the group said. AIPAC lobbyists and their supporters have been speaking directly to a number of lawmakers, especially senators, said House and Senate aides.

( Also on POLITICO: AIPAC to go all-out on Syria)

“At the end of the day, a lot of these Democrats are going to be with the president,” said a House Democratic aide close to the issue. “Because the choice is to vote against [the Syria resolution] and turn the president into a lame duck and destroy his credibility, or swallow it and vote for something that you’re not wild about. When you’re faced with that kind of decision, most of these fence-sitters are going to come aboard.”

Follow @politico

For instance, Rep. Shelia Jackson Lee (D-Texas) said on Thursday that she remains undecided but defended the president, saying Republicans shouldn’t vote against a resolution for purely partisan reasons.

“I remain enormously open,” she said. “I think it’s important the administration maintains a dialogue.”

Yet the trend lines in the House are clearly not moving in the right direction for Obama, Boehner and Pelosi.

( PHOTOS: International response to Syria)

Republicans like Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) — a senior member of the Armed Services Committee and infamously vocal Obama critic — announced he was against military intervention. Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.) also came out against U.S. involvement in the Syria conflict on Thursday, joining with a number of Florida GOP and Democratic lawmakers in opposition to Obama.

Rep. Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.) supported a limited military strike in the immediate aftermath of the chemical attack. Now he feels the moment has passed.

Rep. Adam Smith, a Washington State Democrat who serves as ranking member of the Armed Services panel, returned from a trip overseas and told a local news outlet he didn’t think the United States should get involved in Syria. Smith vowed to listen to the administration make its case, and Vice President Joe Biden called him personally to argue for the White House after his negative comments became public, Democratic sources said.

( See POLITICO’s full Syria coverage)

New York Democrat Rep. Jose Serrano also stated he would vote “no” on Thursday, saying he had “thought long and hard about this decision and have come to the firm conclusion that I cannot vote in favor of war.”

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who was previously undecided, said Thursday he would vote “no.”

In short, no is quickly becoming a default position for many House members regardless of party. It will be up to Obama and party leaders to stem that momentum.

( Also on POLITICO: Alan Grayson: House Syria vote will fail)

Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas) said he thinks the Senate should vote on the Syria resolution on Sept. 11 and defeat it to “honor the victims of 9/11 by refusing to support al Qaeda”

Culberson said he is hearing overwhelmingly from his constituents in opposition of the resolution. “I don’t think it will pass the House,” the Texas Republican said.

“There is no direct American national security interest at stake,” Culberson said following a classified briefing on Syria on Thursday, although he acknowledges that “There is no question the psychopath in Syria has used chemical weapons.

( Also on POLITICO: Joe Manchin a ‘no’ on Syria resolution)

On the Senate side, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and other top Democrats are cautiously optimistic — although by no means sure — that they can get to 60 votes to overcome an expected filibuster. Democratic leaders only have six hard “no’s” at this point, with another dozen undecided.

Reid, though, will lobby Syria opponents to agree to debate even if they will oppose the resolution when it comes up on the Senate floor. Following the 10-7 approval Wednesday in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Reid will hold a short pro forma session on Friday to file the revised use-of-force resolution crafted by Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), chairman and ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee. Reid will file cloture on Monday on the motion to proceed to the resolution when the Senate officially returns from the August recess, setting up a cloture vote for Wednesday. Another cloture vote could come Thursday or Friday on the actual resolution if Reid wins the first round, depending on how much time opponents take. A final Senate vote could come late next week, or it could potentially even slide into the following week.

If the Senate approves the resolution, supporters of the Syrian campaign believe this will help build some momentum in the House. That will be limited by GOP dislike — and, more importantly, disrust — of Obama. And that logic didn’t work on the immigration bill, which was approved by a bipartisan majority in the Senate and has failed to gain any momentum whatsoever in the House.

( WATCH: Susan Collins: I'm wary of U.S. becoming entangled in Syria)

Sen. John Cornyn (Texas), the minority whip, is opposed to the Syria resolution and would oppose it if the vote we today, his aides said.

“If the vote were held today, Sen. Cornyn would vote no,” said Megan Mitchell, Cornyn’s spokeswoman. “What he is waiting to see is a credible plan from the administration that will achieve our national security objectives. Specifically, a plan to keep chemical weapons out of the hands of terrorists.”

In a sign of their confidence that the vote will go down, Republicans are already beginning to blame Obama for not working hard enough to win the vote.

Ginger Gibson and Manu Raju contributed to this report.