« | »

Lawmakers Say War Powers Act Is Outdated

From The Hill:

(Click to enlarge)

Lawmakers say modern warfare has dated the War Powers Resolution

By John T. Bennett – 06/28/11

Republican and Democratic senators continued to disagree over the Libya military operation Tuesday, but a consensus emerged that modern weapons of war have made the War Powers Resolution outdated.

Is it a ‘scientific consensus’?

Still, are we now saying that if a law is ‘outdated’ it can simply be ignored? And who gets to decide whether a law is ‘outdated’ or not? Maybe the so-called ‘debt ceiling’ is also outdated. Maybe the 22nd Amendment is outdated.

Senate Armed Services Committee members again were split along party lines about whether the White House violated the 1973 law by launching military intervention in Libya without congressional notification.

Harold Koh, a senior State Department legal adviser, reiterated the Obama administration’s contention that the president acted within the bounds of the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution, an argument congressional Republicans flatly reject

Not according to Mr. Obama himself, back in December 20, 2007. Back then candidate Obama said: “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”

Mr. Obama’s Libyan mission does not meet that criterion. Libya posed no threat to the US.

Republican panel members mostly blasted the Obama administration for failing to seek congressional approval before launching the mission, which the American military led during the opening weeks.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said by not first coming to Capitol Hill, the White House opted for “sticking a stick in the eyes of Congress," a move he said “undermined the integrity of the War Powers Act."

Panel Chairman Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) took umbrage to Corker’s remarks during a testy exchange, saying he went to Senate leaders before the operation began in March about a use-of-force resolution “but no one wanted to do it.”

Er, we think that is precisely the point. Congress did not want to authorize this use of force. (But Mr. Kerry has always been a bit ‘slow’ on the uptake.)

Saying he would not stand by and let critics “throw darts” at the White House, Kerry added that “any senator can go to the Senate floor” to challenge the constitutionality of the operation, but no senator has done so…

Isn’t this the same John Kerry who talked about the need for ‘regime change’ when President Bush invaded Iraq? An invasion that had official Congressional support.

Because the remotely piloted drones means U.S. military personnel are not directly at risk, senators argued, Obama and all future commanders in chief will be able to build an argument to get around the War Powers Resolution’s definition of hostilities.

For that reason, Kerry and Sen. Dick Lugar (R-Ind.), the panel’s ranking member, agreed it might be time to revist [sic] the post-Vietnam era law.

Unmanned aircraft and other emerging technologies mean wars will be fought “totally differently” in the future, Lugar said.

This means future presidents could shut out Congress when deciding whether to use the U.S. military by “waging war remotely,” Lugar said. With no U.S. troops directly at risk, a legal argument could be framed to get around the War Powers Resolution, he warned.

Some might argue that shelling targets from ships miles off shore or carpet-bombing from B-52s at 30,000 feet didn’t really put the US military at too much risk in Vietnam, either.

To this end, the U.S. involvement is setting a new precedent, Corker warned.

“By the president’s reasoning, we could drop a nuclear bomb on Tripoli” but lawyers could argue that is not hostilities under the 1973 law, Corker said. The same argument could be made, without changes to the law, for Predator strikes, he said

Senator Corker might as well give up. The Democrats probably think they have found a loophole. And that is all they and Mr. Obama ever wanted.

And certainly our media watchdogs aren’t going to challenge them on it.

This article was posted by Steve on Wednesday, June 29th, 2011. Comments are currently closed.

7 Responses to “Lawmakers Say War Powers Act Is Outdated”

  1. Rusty Shackleford says:

    At the end of the day, all anyone ever gets out of this is:

    Republican started wars (regardless of how much Hitlery demanded we do it)=bad
    Democrat started wars (because it’s all ‘humanitarian and stuff’)=good

  2. The Redneck says:

    That’s no surprise. To the Left, our entire Constitution is “outdated.”

  3. Liberals Demise says:

    They are going to do whatever they want and screw you unwashed
    American flea-ons. This band of no good mofos are going to cause a
    street war that will make Greece look like a neighborhood social.
    Everyday I grow more hateful of my so called government.

  4. proreason says:

    Go directly to dictatorship. Do not pass go. Go directly to dictatorship.

  5. Right of the People says:

    “Not according to Mr. Obama himself, back in December 20, 2007. Back then candidate Obama said: “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” ”


    How dare you bring up actual quotes and facts that prove our fearless leader wrong! The man’s got to have his legacy or no one will visit his library after he’s out of office.

  6. canary says:

    Obama has made a decision to TAP into our Oil Reserves, only to be done in a National State of EMERGENCY.

    To think Obama made a statement we are only squirting the fuel tank gun into their planes as U.S. part of mission. Yeah. 100 million dollars a day.

    Obama and his liberal dictators agenda has always been to put U.S. in a National Crisis. Marshall LAW on it’s way in.

    Off Senator Jim Inhofes site (R) who is on the committe to overseer the military. He is the Senator who went up against Boxer and the greenis and proved man made global warming was a hoax.

    “…Recently, I questioned President Obama’s decision to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). The resources in the SPR are only meant to be tapped during national emergencies and have only been used under emergency situations twice. His decision further indicates our nation’s fundamental need to increase domestic energy production.

    War powers outdated will become worse as we cut defense budget. Time to cut out the 100 million spent a day bombing Libya.
    Obama said our only action was fueling the tanks. 100 million a day to stand there with a fuel hose gun.

    WARNING: Obama is tapping our emergency oil supply.

    Palisades Hudson Financial Group:

    Mixed Reviews At Home But Boffo In Beijing

    by Larry M. Elkin, CPA, CFP June 28, 2011

    …The stockpile, which consists of 727 million barrels of oil and related products stored in massive salt caverns beneath Texas and Louisiana,…


    KTUU: Begich, Murkowski Blast Obama on SPR Oil Release
    June 23, 2011|By Ashton Goodell | Channel 2 News

    ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Alaska’s Congressional delegation blasted the Department of Energy plans to release 30 million barrels from the country’s emergency oil stockpile, in an effort to lower oil prices and stabilize oil distribution.

    White House officials say it’s a move to help the economy.


    There is no peace, security, or rest or sleep…
    with Obama in the WH office.

    He’s flown both AF-1s and Boeings AF-1 helicopters to
    to the ground. They are trashed.

    Obama’s raising gas forcing Americans to drive less to save the environment and stay sustainable, is all lies.
    The U.S. is moving into the unsustainable stage.

    Get your “bikes” and “walkers” now, before there’s a shortage and we have to wait on China to build more.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »