

Obama's latest Hill move would mean no standalone vote on his Syria plan. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque (UNITED STATES - Tags: POLITICS CIVIL UNREST)

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) may be the biggest supporter on Capitol Hill of arming and training the moderate Syrian rebels. He co-authored a proposal to do just that back in May 2013, winning a broad bipartisan vote in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Now, with President Obama fully on board the plan, how does Corker intend to vote? Nay.

Corker will oppose the administration’s request if it is handled in the manner that Obama is now requesting, and his opposition demonstrates the hurdles facing White House officials, who have long complained privately about the lack of any congressional buy-in on the major foreign policy issues of the day.

Has Corker changed his position in arming rebels? Not at all. “This is something that should’ve happened a long time ago,” he said Wednesday.

However, in their bid to win support for the Syrian rebel training, White House officials have asked congressional leaders to include the measure on a temporary government funding bill, which was seemingly on a glide-path toward passage until Obama called House Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers (R-Ky.) and requested that he add the Syrian language into the broad legislation. Now, the House has delayed consideration of the funding bill until it can more clearly consider the request to include the Syrian provision.

In other words: Under the scenario that Obama favors, there is no standalone vote on the Syria proposal itself -- it would just be written into the bigger bill.

Corker is one of the conservative Republicans who are opposed to the funding levels set in that bill. He voted against legislation back in December that set the spending caps, known as the Ryan-Murray bill for its authors, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.). So, when push comes to shove on a vote to fund the government and to arm Syrian rebels fighting the Islamic State, Corker will vote no on what is known as a “continuing resolution” to fund federal agencies at current levels.

“There’s a high likelihood I will not support the CR, irregardless of the Syrian rebels,” he explained.

That’s how it will likely go for dozens of other lawmakers, if congressional leaders accede to Obama’s request. The vote will not be perceived as a roll call on foreign policy on Syria – a tiny portion of the overall legislation – but it will instead be taken as a vote on government spending levels. A coalition of outside conservative groups are already agitating their congressional allies to vote no over the provision that keeps open the Export-Import Bank.

Some lawmakers opposed Obama’s proposed executive order on immigration – a group that includes some of the loudest proponents of attacking Islamic State forces – are planning to vote against the government funding bill unless it includes restrictions on presidential actions.

All in all, as long as the leadership follows Obama’s plan, there will be no clarity on congressional support for the president’s foreign policy in the Middle East, even among some who support his position. The bill is still likely to pass -- and with it, the Syria plan -- but its numbers are likely to be skewed. “I don’t know what they’re up to,” Corker said.