Last week I noted the potential for Blue Dog Democrats to basically strip the war supplemental of its spending on domestic programs like an unemployment insurance extension and veterans’ education benefits. Now, The Hill reports that, because some of the domestic spending is not accounted for with a corresponding revenue plan, they are balking:

The supplemental was cut into three sections to allow members to vote against withdrawal from Iraq, against war funding or against domestic spending without blocking the entire bill. Each section is expected to get a majority. The withdrawal section is expected to be stripped out in the Senate. The other two sections will be merged and sent back to the House for final passage.

Blue Dogs could upset that balance by voting against the rule, the procedural device needed to bring the supplemental package to the floor.

Republicans usually vote uniformly against Democratic procedural motions. Under those circumstances, and with the relatively thin Democratic majority, it takes only 15 Democratic defections to bring down the rule.

Asked if there were more than 15 members willing to oppose the rule because of the GI Bill of Rights, Tanner said, “That’s not an unreasonable assumption.”

Rep. Allen Boyd (D-Fla.), another Blue Dog leader, also indicated there is likely enough Blue Dog opposition to block the bill. Asked if there are 15 Blue Dog votes against the rule, he said, “There’s 47 of us, what do you think?”

UPDATE: Defections from the opposite end of congressional Democrats, the ant-war left, could cause further trouble for the bill.

A leader of the Out-of-Iraq Caucus, upset that the spending bill continues the war well into 2009, said this morning that liberal members may join conservative Democrats in voting against the procedural motion needed to bring the bill to the floor.