Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
Mon Sep 2, 2013, 11:38 AM Sep 2013

Congress, be careful what you wish for

Congress, be careful what you wish for

By Steve Benen

<...>

Over the last several days, members of Congress have spoken out with a variety of opinions about U.S. policy towards Syria, but lawmakers were in broad agreement about one thing: they wanted President Obama to engage Congress on the use of military force. Few expected the White House to take the requests too seriously...Because over the last several decades, presidents in both parties have increasingly consolidated authority over national security matters, tilting practically all power over the use of force towards the Oval Office and away from the legislative branch. Whereas the Constitution and the War Powers Act intended to serve as checks on presidential authority on military intervention abroad, there's been a gradual (ahem) drift away from these institutional norms...until this afternoon, when President Obama stunned everyone, announcing his decision to seek "authorization" from a co-equal branch of government.

It's one of those terrific examples of good politics and good policy. On the former, the American public clearly endorses the idea of Congress giving its approval before military strikes begin. On the latter, at the risk of putting too fine a point on this, Obama's move away from unilateralism reflects how our constitutional, democratic system of government is supposed to work.

Arguably the most amazing response to the news came from Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), the chair of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Counterintelligence & Terrorism, and a member of the House Intelligence Committee:

"President Obama is abdicating his responsibility as commander-in-chief and undermining the authority of future presidents. The President does not need Congress to authorize a strike on Syria."

This is one of those remarkable moments when a prominent member of Congress urges the White House to circumvent Congress, even after many of his colleagues spent the week making the exact opposite argument.

- more -

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/08/31/20273174-congress-be-careful-what-you-wish-for

Crash Course: A Guide To 30 Years Of U.S. Military Strikes Against Other Nations
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/crash-course-a-guide-to-30-years-of-us-military-strikes-against-other-nations.php


5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Congress, be careful what you wish for (Original Post) ProSense Sep 2013 OP
Cruise missiles seem to be preferred by Democratic Presidents ... GeorgeGist Sep 2013 #1
You have just got to love this.............. wandy Sep 2013 #2
There are probably many more in Congress who don't like being asked to do their job. n/t ProSense Sep 2013 #5
Peter King is now and has always been annabanana Sep 2013 #3
True. n/t ProSense Sep 2013 #4

GeorgeGist

(25,323 posts)
1. Cruise missiles seem to be preferred by Democratic Presidents ...
Mon Sep 2, 2013, 11:43 AM
Sep 2013

that is when you ignore Drone strikes.

wandy

(3,539 posts)
2. You have just got to love this..............
Mon Sep 2, 2013, 11:44 AM
Sep 2013

My bet is that Peter King won't be the only one whining and crying when they find out that theirs more to the job than meeting with lobbyists.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Congress, be careful what...