Exerting the power of their newfound congressional majority, Democrats in the House of Representatives passed legislation that aims to end the Iraq war.

The bill sets a deadline to bring a majority of American troops home by Sept. 1, 2008.

The legislation, which is the strongest opposition posed yet to the war, was passed Friday by a 218-212 vote, and all but two Republicans opposed it.

The bill was passed as part of a $124 billion emergency war spending request to pay for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for the next six months, with the withdrawal provision that has most troops pulling out by Sept. 1, 2008.

By setting a deadline for the war with their challenge, Democrats are acting on the objections to the war that won them their congressional majority. Passing this legislation may be just the first step in their strategy to wear down all support for the president's current Iraq policy and determine one of their own.

However, investing $124 billion in the war, even with the timetable, is not being assertive and is not reflective of Americans' significant opposition to the war.

While debate over a similar, but less restrictive, plan is moving to the Senate, President Bush has already deemed the measure as "political theater." He said Democrats were putting their judgment above that of top military commanders. Bush has promised to veto attempts by the Senate and House to control the war.

Democrats already have said they would be unable to come up with the two-thirds vote of each congressional house required to override a presidential veto.

Bush's immediate branding of the bill serves to trivialize the issue. By accusing Democrats of proposing the legislation as mere bureaucratic showmanship, Bush is choosing to ignore the root of the legislation: Support for the war is waning.

Democratic leaders who proposed the legislation have said they were taking measures to account for the growing American unrest on the progress and plans for Iraq.

While Democrats are attempting to hold the American government responsible for their actions in Iraq, Bush's threats of veto undermine the American people's demand for action. "Staying the course" is not a viable option.

Although the legislation does put the war on a strict timetable, throwing more money at an increasingly unpopular war just supports the president's unchanging strategy. Americans will be forced to put up with his unsuccessful plan of action for another year and a half.

Democrats in the House are on the right path by setting a deadline, but they must go even further.

To deny funding for the Iraq war would force the president to bring the troops home and end this unpopular war.