Senate Democratic aides are drafting new language for military force in Syria. | REUTERS Uphill battle for Obama on Syria

President Barack Obama faces a clear uphill battle in swaying skeptical lawmakers of the merits of military action in Syria, as top officials were dispatched to Capitol Hill Sunday to make the administration’s case.

In response to concern from a swath of lawmakers, Senate Democratic aides are drafting new language for an authorization of military force in Syria, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said Sunday.


The administration’s proposal is too open-ended — a complaint many lawmakers aired Sunday — Leahy said after leaving the classified briefing. The current version wouldn’t garner his support, but he indicated that a more tightly written draft might.

( Also on POLITICO: W.H. to Congress: Help protect Israel)

“I know it’s going to be amended in the Senate,” said Leahy, who is the longest-serving Democrat in the chamber.

Aides to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) are overseeing the revisions to the authorization of force measure, which seek to narrow the scope for any U.S. military mission in Syria, Democratic sources said.

It is unclear when the revised proposal will be released, or what reception it will get from the White House. Obama administration officials drafted their own resolution that was sent to Capitol Hill on Saturday without congressional input, and it was clear from the moment that it was unveiled that party leaders in both chambers would seek to change it.

( Also on POLITICO: Navy ships on hold, still ready to attack)

On Sunday, a senior administration official said their strategy in selling the Hill on military action “will be to flood the zone.” The official noted that President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough all made calls on Sunday to individual lawmakers and would again hit the phone lines on Monday. On the Labor Day holiday, a conference call was also planned for House Democrats with administration officials.

Obama will also meet on Monday at the White House with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who has expressed skepticism that a limited military strike in Syria will change the balance of power there. The president will also meet with the Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate foreign relations, armed services, and intelligence committees at the White House on Tuesday.

The administration will make the case that failing to punish Syrian President Bashar Assad for using chemical weapons in the region “risks emboldening Assad and his key allies – Hezbollah and Iran,” the official said, adding that “anyone who is concerned about Iran and its efforts in the region should support this action.”

( PHOTOS: Syria: Where politicians stand)

A new authorization of force resolution would need to strike a balance, ensuring that it is specific enough to win over congressional votes but also give Obama flexibility in any military action.

“The administration’s concern is that if you don’t give us enough leeway, we can’t fulfill what we need to do, which is to discourage the Assad regime from holding onto those weapons,” said Rep. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), who said he believed the resolution as currently drafted is too open-ended.

Dozens of lawmakers flowed into a secure Capitol Hill auditorium on an otherwise sleepy Sunday during the summer recess, eager to hear from administration officials on why the United States needs to respond to the Syrian crisis. Seventy lawmakers attended, according to one source with an informal list.

After the members-only briefing, several lawmakers emphasized that Obama has more to do to win their vote.

( PHOTOS: International response to Syria)

“I sense pretty much zero support for boots on the ground and in fact a great deal of skepticism for limited strikes,” Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) told reporters. “There are profoundly unanswered questions about effectiveness, about what happens next.”

He added: “I’m a long way from being a yes vote on even a narrow resolution.”

Rep. Michael Burgess also said he remains unconvinced on the need for action. “I have to tell you, in my mind, it’s far from settled,” the Texas Republican said after the briefing. “Certainly the mood of the district that I represent is: ‘Do not do this.’ And I honestly did not hear anything that told me I ought to have a different position.”

Before the briefing, Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said he’d “probably be leaning no” if an authorization vote were held today. “I think it’s going to be very tough. I think a lot depends critically on how persuasive the president can make the case,” he said.

Follow @politico

Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.), who led an effort to urge Obama to get congressional buy-in on Syria, said the hurdle to pass an authorization resolution was higher in the House than in the Senate.

“If I had to vote today, given what I know, I would vote no,” Rigell told reporters after the briefing. But “I’m also open to the debate.”

Calling the current version a “blank check,” Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) listed a few ways to narrow the draft resolution, such as including a ban on use of ground troops and an expiration date in the legislative language.

“We want to make sure that any authorization is structured, is framed, so that it is very clear we are talking about a targeted, discreet response to the use of chemical weapons,” added Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.).

Hill aides noted the White House-originated use-of-force draft did not prevent the deployment of American ground forces in Syria in order to fulfill the mission of interdicting the Assad regime use of chemical weapons. That restriction is seen by some in Congress as a key to winning support for the military effort in both the House and Senate.

Menendez has a hearing scheduled for Tuesday. Obama administration officials are expected to testify at that session. Menendez and Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), ranking member on Foreign Relations, have both backed a limited U.S. intervention in Syria tied to preventing the further use of chemical weapons.

According to three sources, the administration officials who briefed lawmakers included deputies from the White House, State Department and Pentagon: Tony Blinken, White House deputy national security adviser; Robert Cardillo, deputy director of national intelligence; Ambassador Wendy Sherman, the State Department’s undersecretary for political affairs; James Miller, the under secretary of defense for policy; and Vice Admiral Kurt Tidd, the director of operations for joint staff at the Pentagon.

Among the high-ranking House lawmakers who were seen attending the briefing were House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), the third-ranking House Republican; House Republican Conference Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), and Becerra, the House Democratic Caucus chairman.

A handful of senators were on hand as well, including Democratic Sens. Tom Harkin of Iowa, and Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey of Massachusetts, and Republican Sen. Dan Coats of Indiana.

It will be a considerable challenge for the House leadership if it decides to whip their respective members on the vote to allow use of force in Syria.

“I don’t think matters of military action lend themselves to whipping as a party,” Becerra, the fourth-ranking House Democrat, said. “These are singular votes.”

Still, lawmakers who have consistently pressed for military involvement in response to the Syrian regime’s alleged use of chemical weapons on its citizens argued that the administration has a strong case in favor of use of force — even without Congress’s approval.

“If we stand idly by and allow the gassing of men, women and children by a ruthless thug, it will send a message to every despot across the world and every terrorist group across the world that you can commit war crimes and there’s no penalty for it,” said Rep. Eliot Engel (N.Y.), the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “And I think that’s the most compelling reason for us to take action.

“I think if the Congress acts like the British Parliament, I think that we’ve abrogated our responsibility,” he added.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), the former chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said she was going into the briefing with an “open mind,” eager to hear the Obama administration’s plan for ensuring a limited strike on Syria would remain exactly that — and wouldn’t pull the country into yet another drawn-out and expensive war in the Middle East.

“People want to know that there’s not going to be a military engagement, entanglement, like in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Ros-Lehtinen said. “I’m looking forward to reading more about the resolution that’s going to be drafted — what the goals are, the national security objectives, what happens the day after.”

John Bresnahan contributed to this report.