The 5 ways that Congress is splitting on Syria

[iandhr]

It’s way too early to know how lawmakers will vote on whether to authorize military action in Syria, in part because much of the mechanics of the debate and the exact nature of President Obama’s request to Congress remain unclear.

The Senate will hold committee hearings this week and a full debate and vote the following week, while the House plans to begin debating the issue when it returns to Washington on Sept. 9. Very few lawmakers have said they will vote for or against military action, because most are waiting to see how the Obama administration makes it case in the coming days.
Based on our reporting and the statements issued by lawmakers in the last 24 hours, here’s a general outline of how we believe lawmakers are dividing on the issue of military action in Syria:

The “do it now, already” caucus:
This group includes Sens. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.).
In a strongly-worded statement, Nelson said Saturday that “I support the president’s decision. But as far as I’m concerned, we should strike in Syria today. The use of chemical weapons was inhumane, and those responsible should be forced to suffer the consequences.”

King sharply criticized Obama for waiting for a congressional resolution, saying that he “is abdicating his responsibility as commander-in-chief and undermining the authority of future presidents. The president does not need Congress to authorize a strike on Syria. If Assad’s use of chemical weapons against civilians deserves a military response, and I believe it does, and if the president is seeking congressional approval, then he should call Congress back into a special session at the earliest date. The president doesn’t need 535 members of Congress to enforce his own red line.”


Read More

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/01/the-5-ways-that-congress-is-splitting-on-syria/

[indepat]

1. Is Rep. advocating the president violate international law so he can lead impeachment?

Nah, a swell fella like King would be above board in all things.

[gopiscrap]

2. Interesting read

[MannyGoldstein]

3. "The use of chemical weapons was inhumane"

as opposed to all of the humane uses of ordinance that have killed > 100,000 Syrians?

That must be pretty bad.

[GeorgeGist]

4. Nothing in Obama's request says ...

those responsible should be forced to suffer the consequences

When it names names I might support it.