From The Nation
President Obama failed to seek a
declaration of war before ordering US attacks on Libya. Now, he faces a
challenge under the War Powers Resolution.
By any reasonable reading of the Constitution, that was a violation
of the provision in the founding document that requires the executive to
attain authorization from Congress before launching military adventures
abroad. But presidents have skirted that requirement in recent decades
by claiming that the 1973 War Powers Resolution -- an
act originally intended to constrain presidential war-making -- affords
them the freedom to fight first and consult Congress later.
The War Powers Resolution, enacted in the late stages of the Vietnam
War over a veto by President Richard Nixon, requires the
commander-in-chief to notify Congress within 48 hours of
committing armed forces to military action that he or she determines is
necessary in the face of "a national emergency created by attack upon
the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
The resolution also forbids armed forces from remaining in action for
more than 60 days without Congressional authorization of the use of
military force.
That's not supposed to be a blank check for White House wars of
whim, even if successive presidents have relied on self-serving
interpretations of the law to launch and maintain military endeavors.
This week, however, a leading critic of the Libya mission, Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, is planning to introduce legislation -- pursuant to the War Powers Resolution -- that will assert the constitutional responsibility of Congress to make decisions about declaring war.
Click Here to Read Whole Article
In a letter to fellow members of the House, the Ohio Democrat writes:
"Dear Colleague: Earlier this month, President Obama made his case
for U.S. participation in a United Nations-sanctioned war in Libya. The
President's Office of Legal Council recently released the
Administration's legal justification for the war, arguing that he was
not required to come to Congress for prior authorization because the war
is in our national interest and because it is not really a war. But our
actions in Libya and the Administration's failure to seek authorization
from Congress, as required by Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution,
cannot be justified.
"I intend to offer legislation pursuant to the War Powers Resolution
of 1973 that will address Congress' constitutional responsibility to
make decisions pertaining to the use of U.S. military force abroad.
Doing so will allow Congress the latitude to make an informed decision
under circumstances in which Congress's predictable desire to support
the troops does not skew the debate on the war's legitimacy.
"The costs of this war are already mounting. According to figures
recently released by the Pentagon, the war has cost the U.S. $608
million thus far, not including the costs to deploy U.S. Armed Forces to
participate in the war in Libya. Experts at the Center for Strategic
and Budgetary Assessments believe that the U.S. costs could "easily pass
the $1 billion mark"regardless of how well things go.' If U.S.
"humanitarian intervention' in Kosovo is a precedent, we know that the
U.S. will continue to bear the majority of the cost of military and
post-conflict costs, with the U.S. contributing 25% of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization's military budget. During the Kosovo
conflict, the U.S. spent $2.8 billion fighting the war, and another $2
billion to replace the munitions it used over Kosovo.
"While we may not all agree on the merits of military intervention in Libya, we can all agree that Congress must have the opportunity to have a full and ample debate on the commitment of U.S. Armed Forces to a war abroad. The Constitution is clear: Article 1, Section 8 provides only
Congress with the ability to declare war or authorize the use of
military force. This institution cannot stand by idly as a war of choice with significant ramifications for our national and economic security
is waged in the name of our national interests."
That closing paragraph makes the key statement: "While we may not all
agree on the merits of military intervention in Libya, we can all agree
that Congress must have the opportunity to have a full and ample debate
on the commitment of U.S. Armed Forces to a war abroad."
Democrats and Republicans, conservatives and liberals, swear to
defend and abide by a Constitution that gives Congress, not the
president, the power to declare wars. That oath demands that they
reassert the role of the House and Senate in maintaining the system of
checks and balances that the founders outlined "to chain the dogs of
war."
John Nichols, a pioneering political blogger, has written the Online Beat since 1999. His posts have been circulated internationally, quoted in numerous books and mentioned in debates on the floor of Congress.
Nichols writes about (more...)