So if the House votes "no" but the Senate votes "yes", or vice versa,

[Nye Bevan]

does that count as a "no"? Is that how President Obama would interpret such a scenario?

[mike_c]

1. well, he might "interpret" it any way he likes...

...but he won't have legislation to sign authorizing military force. It has to pass both houses before it goes to the president to sign (or veto).

[Tx4obama]

4. I believe they said on the news that it's a 'resolution' - those are not signed by a president

Only bills/legislation are signed by presidents.

[mike_c]

5. then he's not seeking anything like AUMF?

Interesting.

[Nye Bevan]

10. Yea, that's why I asked.

I understand how laws work, but I don't know how this works.

[iandhr]

2. Thats the million dollar question.

[virgogal]

3. The entire Congress' votes are needed.

[Cali_Democrat]

6. It's a no and I'm sure Obama would interpret it that way.

[1-Old-Man]

7. Both chambers have to pass the same thing for it to count

Just like a law, the vote on one side or the other doesn't matter, only the final version that both chambers agree on counts. Were it otherwise the President would have no constraints, something that would seem to please a good number of the people here.

[gopiscrap]

8. Yeah I was wondering about this also.

will he just take the total combined vote or would a no vote in either house stop the attack.

[meow2u3]

9. He'd have to get the "yes" from both houses

I think the President can take "no" for an answer.

[Tx4obama]

11. Resolutions are not bindiing...

Every time Congress (Senate and House) goes on recess/vacation the House refuses to sign onto the recess resolution that the Senate passes - but they ALL go on an unofficial recess anyway.

Anyway, if the House and/or the Senate do not pass the Syria resolution - Obama will still be free to use limited force, and he can even decide to not use force if Congress does pass the resolution.