The Senate is preparing to begin a debate on several Democratic proposals to force a withdrawal from Iraq, but in contrast to last year -- when Democrats were eager to vote on Iraq over and over -- there is little enthusiasm for a fight:

Democrats privately said Reid was not enthusiastic about resuming the debate on Iraq at this point — he had hoped to put that fight off until the supplemental spending measure comes up later this spring. But Reid, who has become increasingly outspoken against the war, agreed to allow the votes in part because GOP opposition would likely defeat them, limiting the amount of time the Senate would debate the issue...

Republican Senators are aiming to put Democrats in the uncomfortable position of having to cast votes on a measure that links war funding to a scaling down of operations in Iraq. The proposal mirrors similar legislation that failed last year.

As one Republican aide put it: “It’s not as great a vote for them as it once was.”...

“This provides us with an opportunity to talk about the political progress and military progress we’ve seen in Iraq and [allow for a] demonstration of the remarkable split within the Democrat Congress,” said a Republican leadership aide.

Just a year ago, Congressional Democrats couldn't schedule enough votes on Iraq. They wanted to take every opportunity they could to tie Republicans to the president's policy. Now suddenly, they're shying away from a debate that splits their conference. The reason, of course, is the success of the surge -- which has taken away the salience of Iraq as an issue. Voters don't want to see Congress waste its time on Iraq when there are many more pressing issues that need attention.

What does this mean for the general election? Well, if Democrats seek to make Iraq a central point of debate, they better be prepared for Republicans to use it against them. Voters are unlikely to reward politicians for wasting time on the past.