Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., speaks to reporters with Rep. Nancy Boyda, D-Kan., and Rep. Susan Davis, D-Calif. All representatives toured Fort Riley on Monday.

Fort Riley ? The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said Monday that the mission to train U.S. soldiers to advise Iraqi counterparts is working, but it’s coming too late.

“We should have had this two years ago,” said Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., after spending the morning visiting with 1st Infantry Division officials about the training mission at Fort Riley.

“I’m extremely pleased with what I saw. If every unit received the support and priority that this mission has, I wouldn’t have the great concern that I have for the rest of the military,” Skelton said.

His visit, along with Reps. Nancy Boyda, D-Kan.; Susan Davis, D-Calif.; Michael Conaway, R-Texas, and Phil Gingery, R-Georgia, was designed to look at the training mission and its role in assisting armies in Iraq and Afghanistan to establish stability. The visit coincides with the ongoing debate in Congress over the war and how quickly to end U.S. involvement.

More than 2,000 transition teams are training or already in Iraq or Afghanistan for yearlong deployments. Skelton said the teams and several thousand soldiers would likely be needed in Iraq in the future, even if the bulk of combat forces leave.

The House narrowly passed a bill Friday that would pay for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan this year but would require that combat troops come home from Iraq before September 2008 – or earlier if the Iraqi government did not meet certain requirements.

Senators are taking up their version of the spending bill this week but are likely to include nonbinding language regarding troops in Iraq. Like the House measure, the bill faces a presidential veto threat.

Gingery, the ranking Republican on Armed Services, said some wanted a more immediate withdrawal from Iraq, while others say there was money not related to the war included in the supplemental bill.

Gingery said he had concerns about setting a specific timeline for withdrawal in August 2008.

“Because I think there’s a darn good chance, with the funding,” he said, “that, by golly, we just may have them on the run in August of ’08 and we certainly don’t want to pull out too early.”

Both bills would provide funding for numerous military construction projects related to the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure process, which funneled thousands of new soldiers to Fort Riley. The bulk of the money has been released for continued construction on many facilities, including some barracks and the new 1st Infantry Division headquarters.

However, additional funding contained in the House and Senate bills would pay for continued construction at Fort Riley.

Six thousand Fort Riley soldiers are currently in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Col. Jeff Ingram, commander of the 1st Brigade, 1st Infantry Division overseeing the transition team training, said the training mission has improved from a year ago. Soldiers are better prepared to communicate with their Iraqi counterparts and with sufficient equipment, he said.

Boyda, whose 2nd District of Kansas includes Fort Riley, bristled at a line of questions that linked the votes in Congress with Monday’s visit. She said the message of the tour should be on the work being done to train the teams, not the political debate in Washington.

“We need to ask questions, and we need to do it with a gracious heart,” she said. “And we need to make sure we’re not only talking about support for our troops, but we’re coming through with it economically and we’re supporting and listening to what’s going on.”