Friday, February 2, 2007

Congress' War Powers

The Congress Has The Power To End The War, They Merely Lack The Will To Do So

What happened to the Democrats? Very few dispute the election’s meaning: we want them to end the war. We do not want posturing, politicizing, and predicting. We do not want bipartisanship. If we wanted bipartisanship, we would have voted for moderate republicans, such as Lincoln Chafee. We voted for change. The politicians are worried about getting re-elected; otherwise, the war would be over.

The Republicans worry about insulting the President. George Bush showed remarkable ability to raise money. The Texas oilman has been better connected than any modern politician in modern history. The forces of big Pharma, oil, and finance together with the staggeringly wealthy have been richly rewarded for their investments in this administration. The Bush team managed to dismantle the regulators that had checked the rapaciousness of these groups since the New Deal. Bush spent more money than any candidate ever. His receipts for the 2004 election amounted to $367,228,801. (had he relied on government funding the figure would have been a still staggering $74.6 million in government funding for the general election). Bush demonstrated that he can bring the goods. With no heir-apparent, the Republican who can get Bush on board will have a real advantage; they have no edge in making him angry with protest votes now.

The Democrats worry about not showing “support for out troops”. No one wants to be shown as “soft on terror.” Even with a majority opinion that Bush has recklessly proceeded in Iraq, the Dems fear positioning themselves as losing the war.

Do the trappings of Washington power really have mind control forces? It would seem so. It seems to be one thing to complain about Washington in Minneapolis, and another to complain in DC.

The Congress has the power to end the war in two ways. Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution vest war making powers in the Congress, a part of the often voiced “checks and balances’ genius of the document:

The Congress shall have the power... To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water; To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years; To provide and maintain a navy; To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces; To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress...

This power includes not only the intent to begin war, but also the extent of the war. In giving Congress the power to declare war, the Constitution gives it authority to make decisions about a war’s scope and duration. The Founders, including James Madison, who is often called “the father of the Constitution,” fully expected Congress to use these powers to rein in the commander in chief. “The constitution supposes, what the History of all Governments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it,” Madison cautioned. “It has accordingly with studied care, vested the question of war in the Legislature.” The Congress may also end the war by not funding the war-the so-called “power of the purse.”

In other words, the Democrats have the power to end the war, they merely lack the will to do so. With the election on the horizon, too many Senators running for office are in key positions and will not do the right thing.

May God have mercy on us all.

No comments: