methinks more than a few on both sides of the aisle have a deathwish for this nation and are prepared to go to any length to accomplish it. jmo
The only way to force the President to do anything in regards to the military would be to change the Constitution. We already have the War Powers Act long ignored by Presidents of both parties.
This is stupid.
Congress twice voted for war in Iraq.
If this law is intended to prevent Congress from voting for war, it completely misses the mark.
Congress was consulted and voted for war twice.
Are these guys so stupid they think they can change that?
These guys were cabinet officials?
I don’t think we need a law for Congress to give its opinion to the President.
The can give 535 opinions, and do.
They could give one opinion telling the President exactly what to do. But don’t. Any Congress can stop any war any day it wants, simply by legislating it to stop, and defunding it to stop. They did this in 1974 but don’t have the spine or unity to do so in 2008. That’s why we have an executive office — to act while Congress pontificates.
Screw Baker and Christopher and the Depends-equipped pony they rode in on.
Those two globalist phuckwits need to just go enjoy the buffet and then finish their damn shufleboard game.
Baker, what a putz. This guy should know better.
We can’t agree on anything in Congress, and this guy thinks that running a war by committee is a great idea.
The Executive Branch holds that power. It holds it for a reason. Presidents don’t act without talking to folks on both sides of the isle. And that’s all there needs to be.
Congress can vote to shut down a war campaign easily if it wants to, and the consensus is there. And that is how it should be.
Baker, you really need to go away.
What a waste of time.
Do these people have anything else better to do with their time?
Put that thinking to better use by figuring out how to make the price of gasoline cheaper.
Congress critters always claims that the Executive branch impede the constitutional powers of the Legislative branch of government, but it’s usually the other way around.
The proposed law would require Congress to vote on a resolution of approval or disapproval. But it would not require the president to win lawmakers' consent. The president could simply veto a congressional resolution of disapproval and continue combat operations.
So if the POTUS can ignore what congress does per this new law, then this law does exactly.. what? Give Durbin & Schumer more face time on C-SPAN to call our troops Nazis?
Sheesh, if they want to be 'series' just pass a law that Congress MUST formally Declare War before the POTUS can send troops into harms way. If its declaring war against Al-Qaeda, Botswana, Iran, Hamas or the Gambino crime family so be it. Go on record with a vote, yae or nay, and be done with it.
They may as well, because Billy Jeff showed the War Powers Act is toothless when it came to his little Balkan War. He ignored that, the Dem's sacred cow called the U.N. and utterly bastardized NATO's Charter and purpose in using them against Serbia Yugoslavia. (talk about an 'Illegal War', that was it, in spades.)