Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Biden Op-Ed: War powers extend to the Congress (about separation of powers)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-17-08 08:37 PM
Original message
Biden Op-Ed: War powers extend to the Congress (about separation of powers)
Edited on Wed Sep-17-08 08:45 PM by JoeIsOneOfUs
I don't want to cut anything out, so here's the whole thing - I don't think Joe would mind :)

http://biden.senate.gov/press/press_releases/release/?id=0aaa1734-5074-4efc-ab38-f61efc566d57

OP-ED: War powers extend to the Congress

September 17, 2008

The News Journal
War powers extend to the Congress
Sen. Joseph R. Biden
September 17, 2008

On July 4, 1776, representatives from the 13 United States of America unanimously declared independence from the tyranny of the king of Great Britain. They fought with their compatriots until, in 1783, the British signed the Treaty of Paris and recognized the fledgling United States' right to self-governance.

In 1787, our Founding Fathers met in Philadelphia to enshrine their opposition to despotism and their commitment to democratic self-government in a document that would reflect the nation's core principles.

The Founders were no strangers to threats to their new homeland. The Spanish occupied the Western two-thirds of the continent, and the vanquished British occupied Canada to the north. National security was foremost in the Founders' minds when they set forth to devise a system of government.

George Washington presided over the Constitutional Convention. He was our first commander in chief and was to become its first president. It is hard to imagine a figure with a more sophisticated understanding of how to secure not just the territorial borders of the United States, but the principles and values that defined the nation.

The Founders reserved power to the states and recognized inviolable rights and liberties of citizens. To protect against the consolidation and abuse of power within the federal government, they divided power among executive, legislative and judicial branches. Each branch also was subject to checks and balances by the others, especially the executive, which evoked unwelcome memories of British monarchy.

And they required the president to stand for election every four years, thus placing in the hands of the people a powerful check against abuse -- the ability to vote the president out of office.

In Article II of the Constitution, the Founders vested in the president the responsibility to faithfully execute the laws, along with the express power to command the armed forces, to make treaties, and to appoint ambassadors, Supreme Court justices and officers of the executive branch. None of these powers granted to the president were absolute, however.

The Founders were emphatic that our government was to be one of shared powers. James Madison emphasized this in Federalist No. 47, where he wrote the three branches should "by no means" be "totally separate and distinct from each other."

One cannot fully understand the president's powers, therefore, without also understanding how the powers granted in Article II interrelate with the legislative prerogatives in Article I, the judicial authority in Article III, the reservation of power to the states, and the recognition of individual rights and liberties.

First and foremost, the Congress enacts the laws, and the president must faithfully execute them. Congress may enact laws that create authority the president would not otherwise have, like the authority to require that drugs be tested for safety before they are marketed to consumers.

And Congress may enact laws that prohibit the president from acting, such as tapping an American citizen's telephone without a warrant.

The Supreme Court, which has in the words of Chief Justice John Marshall the "duty ... to say what the law is," may prevent executive overreaching by deciding cases regarding the breadth and scope of presidential power. Justice Robert Jackson's concurring opinion in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer is widely recognized as the best articulation of Congress's ability to restrict presidential power by exercising its legislative authority.

Jackson explained that when Congress supports the president through legislation authorizing his actions, the president's power is at its peak. But when the president acts in contravention of the express will of Congress, his power is weakest. Where Congress has not expressed its will, Jackson identified a "twilight zone" in which the president may act so long as he or she does not infringe upon state sovereignty or the recognized rights of the American people.

The president's powers to command the armed forces and protect the nation are not exempt from these limits. In the Constitution, the president is assigned the role of "commander in chief of the army and navy of the United States." The Constitution vests in Congress, however, the power to "provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;" "to declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal and to make rules concerning captures on land and water;" to raise, support and maintain the armed forces; to make rules governing those forces; to suppress insurrections and repel invasions; and to organize, arm and discipline militias employed in the service of the United States.

As originally drafted, the Constitution would have given Congress the power to "make war." At the Constitutional Convention, James Madison and Elbridge Gerry argued that Congress should rather have the power to "declare war" so that, in an era in which convening Congress required weeks of travel by many members, the president retained the power "to repel sudden attacks."

The Founders vested the power to initiate war in Congress to deny to the president the unfettered power to start wars that the British king had enjoyed. Even Alexander Hamilton, a staunch advocate of presidential power, emphasized the president's power as commander in chief would be "much inferior" to the British king, amounting to "nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces, as first general and admiral" while that of the British king "extends to the declaring of war and to the raising and regulating of fleets and armies -- all of which, by Constitution, would appertain to the legislature."

The Constitution vests the Legislature with a broader stake in waging war than in other foreign policy prerogatives assigned primarily to the president. When the Constitution addresses important matters of foreign affairs, such as the power to make treaties and appoint ambassadors, it shares power between the president and just the Senate. When it comes to war powers, the Constitution shares power with both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

As the "people's house," the House was intended to be closely attuned to public support for the vast commitment of lives and resources incident to war.

Moreover, involvement of both chambers in the decision to go to war encourages debate and careful deliberation in all except those cases in which the necessity of fighting was overwhelmingly obvious to the nation as a whole.

The system of shared powers and checks and balances enshrined in the Constitution has protected our country, and preserved our rights and liberties, for 219 years. When presidents have respected the power vested in Congress and sought its cooperation and consent before committing the lives of young Americans and the resources of taxpayers, they have acted not only with the legal authority of the Constitution but with the support of the public behind them.

Each time a president has exceeded the limits of his power, our Constitution's system of checks and balances has worked to restore equilibrium. The Supreme Court has repeatedly struck down the Bush administration's sweeping exercise of unilateral power in matters of national security.

While the high court has yet to rule on a number of abuses, among them the wiretapping of citizens without warrants and the torture and abuse of detainees, Americans will have the opportunity this November to exercise another safeguard against consolidation and abuse of executive power. That is the right to vote for a presidential candidate who respects the constitutional role of Congress and the courts, the rule of law, and the rights and liberties of Americans.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
abumbyanyothername Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-17-08 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. You know
I was really disappointed when Obama picked Biden. I was not much impressed with his convention speech.

But I have watched a couple of stump speeches on the internet and today's forum with Hillary and now this article.

I was wrong.

I am REALLY impressed with Joe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-17-08 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Those of us who have been Biden fans for a while didn't like the convention speech
It was clear that 1/2 of it was him, and 1/2 of it was written for him - and that he had to be toned down for the venue.

Biden is at his best either in full oratory on the stump, or quiet and serious in a Senate hearing or a sit-down situation like an interview or the forum with HRC.

I think they were keeping things a little quiet until the GOP Convention, Palin hysteria, hurricanes, 9/11 were past. No holding back from either of them now.

Biden's favorability ratings in a poll today were really good too. I think some GOPers know and hate/fear him, but a lot of people just didn't know him, but they're liking what they learn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1corona4u Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-17-08 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Yep, what you said.
:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-17-08 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. ...
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. Well said, JIOOU - and thanks for the OpEd! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tigress DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #2
10. His speech at the convention had a real warmth to it I thought.
It sounds like those who know him see him as either tough or intelligently delivering the goods. A man's man.

I know the times he popped up in the news supporting needed legislation or blasting some stupid rethug trick I liked his hutzpah.

But the information about his family situation and his devotion to his kids was important to me to understand his priorities. It's one thing to write a bill that protects women, it's another to have to be mother and father to your kids when the other parent dies. He could have ran from that but he didn't.

Toning himself down gave Obama the spotlight and it shows me he can be VP without regrets or shenanigans.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #10
21. agree with you
I really love some of the interviews he did in the primaries, which I think few people saw - covered his family history and some politics. I think he shines in one-on-one interviews on that stuff. The one with Judy Woodruff, and one with someone at ABC. Unfortunately, his YouTube channel has been reorganized and I think only new stuff is up.

And your last sentence is right on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 05:26 AM
Response to Reply #2
20. Kickin it for Joe, who is kickin' AZZ for US!!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jillan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-17-08 10:02 PM
Response to Original message
5. As someone brought up yesterday - what a relief it is going to be to have *2* constitutional law
scholars in the WhiteHouse.....especially after the last 8 years.

Just tell me one thing - when does he find time to write Op-eds these days?


Love ya Joe!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tigress DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. I second or third that sigh of relief.
I suppose he writes them on the way from one stump to the other.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #5
22. Maybe he pulled out his lecture notes for a head start :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-17-08 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. Joe has always hated abuse of power
and he does not want a Shrub like figure to ever get in the Whitehouse again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tigress DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. My kind of DEM nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eyes_wide_ open Donating Member (417 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
7. As I've found to be the case with Obama
Edited on Thu Sep-18-08 12:11 AM by Eyes_wide_ open
I like Joe better every time I hear him speak, or read his words. I've never enjoyed "politics", so even after that madman that now occupies the White House made me aware of my obligation to pay attention, it was particular issues that commanded my attention ... not so much the 'names' involved other than my own Congressman.

I had never heard of Joe Biden before I came to DU, other than to know his name was among the seemingly endless list of candidates y'all had in the Primaries ;) One of the reasons I waited it out until the Democratic candidate was chosen was that there were just so many, and I was still working then (laid off now) and there just was no way I had time to research them all.

During the VP speculation I did check him out somewhat as so many people here thought so highly of him. My first choice Wes Clark because he won my heart with the incident that seems to have gotten him exiled from the limelight (I've not given up hope that perhaps Obama has something else in mind for him yet) but I was not unhappy with his choice of Joe. I just didn't know what to expect and have to say that I've been pleasantly converted. He has proven himself a formidable combatant, and I like that.

Thanks for the OP, it is a good, and informative read.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tigress DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 01:10 AM
Response to Reply #7
14. And their words and actions are congruent. These aren't do as I say not as I do types.
Both Obama and Biden seem to really have the right stuff and all the other DEMs like Clark and Clinton (and even Edwards if he can live down his notoriety) can help out in the new administration.

What the rethugs have is consistency of approach and a homogeneous message that they drill well, but it's like fighting the old British Guard. If you just hold your fire until you see the whites of their eyes and then blast them to bits, it works.

We have to stand and take the best they have to give and then come back at them in the clench. Make sure all that filth they spew gets returned to them and sticks on them and not us.

We have such a wide variety of skill and talent that when we even PARTIALLY apply ourselves to working together we can't help but win. They have the stubborn energy of willful 4 year olds and about the same type of tactics too, it wears us down to the bitter edge of losing our sanity to try and understand it. But once we have it we can get ahead of them and tag team our way out of having to let them see us worry.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eyes_wide_ open Donating Member (417 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. I agree

They are both very genuine, very REAL people ... and it shows in their words, and their actions. I don't know that I've ever felt that from ANY politician before, though admittedly I've been apolitical in the past. But these guys make me believe we CAN make a difference, and I'm happy to do my part to help them succeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tigress DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 01:53 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. Jimmy Carter, John Conyers, Barbara Boxer & 1 local repug Jim Ramstad
Although some people tell me Jim Ramstad is a slick career politician I went to a Town Hall meeting with him in Edina MN and he was actually listening to us and some were ripping him a new one. After he left it wasn't a week before the rethugs started focusing on keeping their jobs. If all he did was come home and find out that WE THE PEOPLE were onto them and took that news back, I still thought he was sincere in his own way. Know what I mean?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #7
23. you're welcome and by the way
I love your profile comment :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 12:14 AM
Response to Original message
8. Rec'd and a
kick for reading tomorrow..thanks, JIOUS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 01:03 AM
Response to Original message
13. I'm eagerly awaiting a similar piece from McCain's VP pick. Think I'll have to wait long? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tigress DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Ah that gave me a great chuckle. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eyes_wide_ open Donating Member (417 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patomime Donating Member (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 01:56 AM
Response to Original message
19. Joe has always been ....
my best imaginary friend. Someone like my grandpa that I don't have anymore. Now he is really my best friend, and one of our best friends for this country. He is at once a legislator, dynamo and someone (I hate this expression) yes I could have a beer with. He has it all, and so does Barack. They make a complete team, one this country cannot do without.

I believe in our ticket, and I think I believe in our country once again.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #19
25. you should post more often - you're a quality over quantity poster :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patomime Donating Member (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. Thank you ...
you just made me smile -- I've been here a while -- and usually just read what the braniacs here are saying (and they're a lot of them).

Thanks again - I love my DU - keeps me from going insane -- what with all the silly news coverage.


:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oviedodem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
24. The debate is going to be a MUST watch
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
weezie1317 Donating Member (480 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-18-08 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
26. Brilliant! And I hope this is discussed during the VP debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 12:47 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC