Washington (CNN) – As the U.S. military campaign in Libya approaches the 60-day mark this Friday, six Republican senators wrote President Obama asking if he will comply with the War Powers Act, which says Congress must authorize action that lasts more than 60 days.
"Friday is the final day of the statutory sixty-day period for you to terminate the use of the United States Armed Forces in Libya under the War Powers Resolution. Last week some in your Administration indicated use of the United States Armed Forces will continue indefinitely, while others said you would act in a manner consistent with the War Powers Resolution. Therefore, we are writing to ask whether you intend to comply with the requirements of the War Powers Resolution. We await your response," wrote the GOP senators Wednesday.
The letter was signed by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Oklahoma, Sen. Jim DeMint, R-South Carolina, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah.
The GOP senators said they believe the president already violated part of the War Powers Act – which says the president's constitutional powers allow him to only deploy troops into "hostilities" with a declaration of war, specific authorization from Congress or a national emergency caused by an attack on the U.S.
But the president did follow the provision in the 1973 law requiring him to provide information to Congress about committing U.S. forces. Now the question is whether he will abide by the part of the War Powers Act which says he must get Congressional permission within 60 days.
Sen. John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said on Tuesday that he is "talking to the administration" about what exactly Congress and the White House might do to abide by that looming 60-day deadline Friday with regard to Libya.
"We want to make sure we're not stretching anything inappropriate. So we're looking at some language," Kerry said as he entered a weekly policy lunch in the Capitol with Democratic senators. "We're really looking at it very seriously to keep everyone on the same page."
Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, a vocal advocate of U.S. military support for the Libyan rebels, has been in talks for weeks with Democrats and Republicans about a resolution backing the Libya mission – but perhaps something short of voting on a War Powers resolution. He said Tuesday that congressional leadership has not shown an "inclination" to vote on something.
McCain said he doesn't believe the War Powers Act is constitutional and therefore he doesn't believe the president needs congressional authorization to continue the mission.
"I've never recognized the constitutionality of the War Powers Act, nor has any president, either Republican or Democrat," McCain said.
But Sen. Rand Paul told CNN congress should not let any president get away with launching military action without congressional approval, and that he and his colleagues may go to the Supreme Court and ask for a ruling on whether the president is in violation of the law.
"There is a law. It's on the books, and in plain reading of the War Powers Act, he appears to be in violation of the War Powers Act," said Paul.
Paul said they will also attempt to push "legislative remedies" on the Senate floor, but acknowledges that may be hard to accomplish since Democrats control the schedule.
"To me it's the most important debate we'll ever have up here. If we're going to send someone, your son or my son to war, its important that it be done properly, and its important that if there are constitutional restraints, we obey them," said Paul.
(End of story, my comments follow.)
Maybe some legal beagle can correct me but this thing seems pretty straightforward. I'd say B.O. & Co. need to do some dealing with Congress asap.
IMO McCain is full of shit as a Christmas goose. He doesn't get to decide the constitutionality of the Act, thats the province of the Supremes. As for no President abiding by it, seems I recall under Reagan we were in and out of Grenada under 60 days, likewise for Clinton and Bosnia. G.W. Bush get Congressional approval for both Afghanistan & Iraq. What McCain's game is lately I don't know but he seems to grab the spotlight at every opportunity possible by stances such as this, stances that cast him in the role of The Loyal Opponent Who Remains Objective. Sheesh, whatever.
So here we have a Chief Executive who supposedly is a Constitutional expert, his Justice Department has already decided to not enforce the Defense of Marriage Act and now he seems to be taking on the powers reserved for Congress.
He has a very compliant Judicial Branch, judging by some of the rulings coming from appellate courts. The Supremes are nuetral at best, tilting leftward at worst. We already have his “czars”, set to circumvent the Constitution even further by regulating us all to death.
The Imperial Presidency continues to take shape. At one time I'd have believed the military would be a major obstacle to him but I’m starting to doubt it. Look at how meekly & quietly the Pentagon accepted the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”. It doesn't matter that the majority of patriotic citizens in uniform are finding further service out of the question due to this and other policies. The buttkissers at the top will be the ones who direct the troops and that direction will be typical of many peacetime brass. They’ll follow all lawful orders, only the definition of “lawful” will be twisted like a pretzel and there'll be no questioning of it.
Ditto for our police forces. After over 40 years of being typed as “pigs” being a cop has become increasingly cast as being an armed thug. Most of our peace officers are STILL the best and noblest in the nonmilitary population. But am I the only one noticing an upsurge in stories of abusive cops? When the memo from DHS came out typing potential right wing terrorists as believers in the 2nd Amendment, limited government, religious, prolife and veterans was there any outrage expressed by any police department administration? We heard none in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. To me that is a very telling sign. We hear at times how police officers will refuse to follow government policy in areas such as immigration, drug enforcement, etc. There has been nary a peep heard about finding the DHS memo absurd.
When you style an occupation as fit only for brutes, that is what you will increasingly attract. I say this as one who always gives the cop on the beat the benefit of the doubt. But lately I pay more attention to things I never did before.
So B.O. will have what he needs to enforce all Empirical edicts. A compliant Judicial Branch coupled with an emasculated Legislative Branch will allow him full rein over us all. All dissenters will be silenced.
All we need now are reeducation camps.
Will we see an end in 2012? Now there is a good question. I'm not into conspiracy theories but I'm also smarter than a box of rocks. B.O. loves being Commander-in-Chief (bet he sported a "woody" for days after the SEALs nailed bin Laden). His political background (thinking of the likes of Alinsky & Bill Ayers here) tends to the philosophy of "the ends justifies the means". IMO he would positively LOVE four more years of power. Four years at a minimum I should say, get enough opponents silenced and keep your base happy should be enough to insure a smooth transition to President For Life. But even without that, I think we can count on four more years of efforts to weaken/dismantle the Constitution.
Hell, he'd have damned little opposition as it is for anything he wishes to do. How many of us are really familiar with the War Powers Act? I knew zippo before seeing it referenced in a news article the other day. Yet it is definetly a very important piece of legislation, I'd say it rises to the level of "posse comitatus" in the consequences of it's enforcement. Yet does the average Joe Sixpack even know the damned thing exists?
So we're in for some REALLY interesting times over the next couple of years at least.
