It is easy to understand why a significant piece of federal legislation got lost in the shuffle last weekend.

Understandably, the fallout from the Friday night presidential debate between Barack Obama and John McCain and the pending congressional vote on a $700 billion financial bailout made it one of the most intense weekends of news in memory.

While the senators and representatives were hanging around Washington, they were doing a little bit more than politicking and posturing.

Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., was one of three authors of legislation that will affect this country's future spending in Iraq.

The language, which transfers Iraqi reconstruction responsibility from American taxpayers to the Iraqi government, is part of the 2009 National Defense Authorization bill. The bill, which was previously approved by the House, was passed by the Senate and moved on to President Bush's desk. He should sign it.

As Bayh emphasized, it makes little sense for the United States to continue financing daily operations and the reconstruction of Iraq while that country is sitting on a $79 billion surplus.

The legislation bans the use of U.S. funds on reconstruction projects in Iraq costing more than $2 million. And, reconstruction projects costing more than $1 million must be certified by the secretary of defense before U.S. taxpayer dollars can be spent.

Another stipulation is that the president must forge a cost-sharing agreement with the Iraqi government for U.S.-Iraqi combined operations -- including training and equipping Iraqi troops -- as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom. We commend Bayh for his role in shifting the cost of Iraqi operations. It is something the president should have done long ago.

###