The deadline is tomorrow. A Saturday. (Also the beginning of Zombie Weekend.)
Will the mood of the country overlook this little statutory requirement, now that America is still basking in the warmth of bin Laden’s death? Assuming the news article is reflecting true sentiment from both parties, why has this not made front page news until today. Washington, complicit with the Washington-based media, often drops these critical issues on Fridays, often late in the day so that they escape the normal news cycles. It allows the mere existence of the weekend to cause the story to be buried before Monday.
Yet, it appears we have a President, along with Congressional leaders, looking the other way when it comes to the WPA. Was the recent bombing of Libyan navel vessels now in the news an attempt to shore up support for continued involvement, even though the WPA requires Congressional action/approval by tomorrow?
FWIW, I think the White House is playing games here, and Congressional leaders are complicit. More erosion of the rule of law.
Congress essentially gave up on their responsibilities to oversee war making in 2003 with Iraq. They could not even agree on a way to fund it. Since they cannot come to agreement on whether the sky is blue, they certainly do not want to stick their necks out and be accountable for anything that happens in Libya. Better to leave it on the shoulders of the excec branch.
It is a very sad situation, but the power of congress has diminished significantly over the years. There is no positive in making a decison and it is just easier to give these powers over to the executive and let them be responsible for the failures and then get on the bandwagon for any success. And no president, no matter how high-minded, will ever willfully give up the powers that congress has given to them by lack of their own leadership.
I have mixed felling about this. On the one hand, I feel strongly that the right to make war should reside with the congress, on the other side, congress these days is so dysfunctional that given 60 days they couldn’t reach an agreement about pizza toppings much less foreign policy. I suspect that many republicans in congress might approve of an aggressive stance against Libya but don’t want to be seen publicly supporting anything that Obama’s doing.
Also this seems a bit less of a war than do some other actions. Its under the direction of NATO with no troops on the ground and being led largely by other nations. It sounds like we are more providing support than actually making war.
So I’m willing to give Obama a pass on this on practical grounds, but I will admit to some discomfort.
For all of the arguments about Congress abdicating responsibility after 2003, or not questioning the administration properly in 2002-2003, the fact remains that Bush sought an AUMF from Congress and Congress voted one in.
Technically, I don’t think tomorrow is a hard deadline anyway. If Congress fails to act, the President has another 30 days to withdraw our forces from the conflict without arguably violating the law.
I think it would be a very interesting case if it goes to court. There is one school of thought that says the War Powers Act is unconstitutional because it infringes on the powers of the President as Commander in Chief. That theory has not actually been tested so far as I know.
There also appears to be some wiggle room here–as I understand it, there are no U.S. ground troops involved, the bulk of the fighting is done by non-U.S. NATO forces–perhaps it could be argued that our involvement has not been continuous for the whole 60 days, so the Act isn’t triggered. I dunno if that would fly or not. I suspect that any attempt to litigate is going to fail…there are various ways to buy enough time for the situation to resolve itself, rendering the court action moot…
Congress will magically come up with an “exception” that keeps them from having to put their beliefs on paper so that they will not have to be accountable.
Wait, but what would the President have to withdraw from, exactly? I’m under the impression that we are no longer dropping bombs, but simply offering support to NATO and other allies who are in combat operations.
I’m not sure that the War Powers Resolution really prohibits us from refueling allied planes, providing intelligence to our allies, and so on. If we are actually still engaged in combat operations, of course, that’s another thing.