NYT op-ed, James A. Baker III and Warren Christopher: Put War Powers Back Where They Belong

[DeepModem Mom]

Put War Powers Back Where They Belong
By JAMES A. BAKER III and WARREN CHRISTOPHER
Published: July 8, 2008


(Edel Rodriguez)

....A bipartisan group that we led, the National War Powers Commission, has unanimously concluded after a year of study that the law purporting to govern the decision to engage in war — the 1973 War Powers Resolution — should be replaced by a new law that would, except for emergencies, require the president and Congressional leaders to discuss the matter before going to war....

***

Our proposed new law, the War Powers Consultation Act of 2009, does not pretend to resolve the underlying constitutional issues — only a constitutional amendment or a Supreme Court decision could do that. It would reserve the ability of both Congress and the president to assert their constitutional war powers. In drawing up the statute we focused on a common theme that almost all past proposals shared: the importance of meaningful consultation between the president and Congress before the nation is committed to war.

Our proposed statute would provide that the president must consult with Congress before ordering a “significant armed conflict” — defined as combat operations that last or are expected to last more than a week. To provide more clarity than the 1973 War Powers Resolution, our statute also defines what types of hostilities would not be considered significant armed conflicts — for example, training exercises, covert operations or missions to protect and rescue Americans abroad. If secrecy or other circumstances precluded prior consultation, then consultation — not just notification — would need to be undertaken within three days.

To guarantee that the president consults with a cross section of Congress, the act would create a joint Congressional committee made up of the leaders of the House and the Senate as well as the chairmen and ranking members of key committees. These are the members of Congress with whom the president would need to personally consult. Almost as important, the act would establish a permanent, bipartisan staff with access to all relevant intelligence and national-security information.

Congress would have obligations, too. Unless it declared war or otherwise expressly authorized a conflict, it would have to vote within 30 days on a resolution of approval. If the resolution of approval was defeated in either House, any member of Congress could propose a resolution of disapproval. Such a resolution would have the force of law, however, only if it were passed by both houses and signed by the president or the president’s veto were overridden. If the resolution of disapproval did not survive the president’s veto, Congress could express its opposition by, for example, using its internal rules to block future spending on the conflict....

(James A. Baker III, the secretary of state from 1989 to 1992, and Warren Christopher, the secretary of state from 1993 to 1997, are the co-chairmen of the National War Powers Commission.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/08/opinion/08baker.html?pagewanted=all

[Frustratedlady]

1. Hmm! Does this mean George did it all wrong?

I thought he did consult a cross-section of Congress. Oh, yeah! They were Republicans.

I wonder if Baker has convinced Daddy that George is a failure and we are going to have to clean up after him, as history will show has always been the case.

[grasswire]

2. well, this is hilarious

If there ever was a crook, it's Baker.

[Demeter]

3. So, the Reagan Acolytes Have a Change of Heart?

Situational ethics in motion.

[struggle4progress]

4. This is mostly a load of unmitigated crap, which (given Baker's involvement) is unsurprising

There's no doubt that the war-making authority lies with Congress. The Constitution is completely clear: Article I Section 8 lists among the powers of Congress

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;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;

Note that no standing Army is contemplated and that the authorities to call forth, organize, support, arm, discipline, and regulate the armed forces, as well as war declaration authority, remains with Congress

Article II Section 2 merely says he President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

The War Powers Act needs to be strengthened, not weakened in the manner advocated by these folk. Nobody could possibly know what the hell "combat operations .. expected to last more than a week" means for example, and the proposed 2/3 majority of Congress required to override a Presidential decision essentially cedes Congressional Warmaking powers to the Executive

[Doctor_J]

5. Yes, now that a Dem will be prez, the wingers want the Constitution

back in place. Just like the fucking whores in the media want to suddenly start being journalists again. Can we please start the revolution soon?

[ixion]

6. only Congress can declare war

period. End of discussion. The President doesn't have 'war powers'. There is a war criminal who seized the WH in a coup d'tat who has been (in violation of the Constitution) making war w/o a formal declaration of war. He and his cronies belong in the Hague.

It is time to restore the Republic, not to move forward with tyranny and corruption, as these idiots postulate.

[sourmilk]

7. Doesn't Baker III have an office next to Georgie's?

The running DC joke is that Baker's REAL office is Oval-shaped and he lets Georgie play on the carpet, from time to time.

[twiceshy]

8. I am all for putting the responsibility back on Congress.

The War Powers Act has been in place since the tail-end of the Vietnam conflict and has been used by Democratic and Republican presidents alike. It is basically a smokescreen by which our gutless, spineless, responsibility-shirking congress people are able to shine-it-on to the executive. Imagine if GWB had to have come before congress and requested an up/down vote on the war in Iraq?