Who Has the Power?
White House Photo/David Bohrer
Under normal conditions, a Senate committee vote on a non-binding resolution would not be the simultaneous front page story on the BBC, China Daily and Al Jazeera English. But these are not normal circumstances.
In defiance of expert advice from the Iraq Study Group and in opposition to at least one interpretation of the mid-term election results, the president is increasing the number of American troops in Iraq. In response, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved a non-binding resolution saying the president's plan was "not in the national interest." One Republican and all 11 Democratic committee members voted for the measure which now goes to the full Senate.
While the president holds most of the cards in controlling U.S. foreign policy, the Congress is not without power. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) said, "This Congress was never meant to be a rubber stamp. Read the Constitution. The Congress has the power to declare war. And on multiple occasions, we used our power to end conflicts."
Meanwhile, Vice President Dick Cheney says Congress "won't stop us."
The rest of the world is about to get a crash course in high-stakes U.S. Constitutional politics.
Comments
The analysis does not take into account the imperatives of aa ongoing war and the tendency of the domestic opposition to politicise everything for its partisan advantage.
Thanks for the response. I am not sure I offered a real “analysis” here. Just a snapshot of where things stand.
When you refer to the domestic opposition, do you mean the Republicans in the opposition in Congress or the Democrats in oppostion to the White House?
Keith
About.com Guide to U.S. Foreign Policy
I think you are intetionally skirting the really important point.
Failure in Iraq would certainly raise the points raised throughout this site to become the central themes for the next decades.
Eventually no ambition could possibly be pursued with this pattern and even amount of spending.
The United States however will declare itself incapable, culturally, to ever prosecute a war that is about more than the immediately explainable interests.
It will be established that if you can keep the US from quickly attaining it’s aimes, the Home Front will collapse.
That is the most consequential outcome you could have of the current ‘debate’.
Please enlighten us further as to your agenda when it comes to these questions