On Iraq: The Democratic Congress Appears Prepared To Abdicate Its Constitutional Responsibilities
By Big Tent Democrat, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 04:16:06 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Posted on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 04:16:06 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
MYDD interviews Speaker Pelosi, who has this to say about Iraq:
Jonathan Singer: You talked about the real need to have 60 votes in the Senate and perhaps even 67 and 290 in the House to override the President and get things done. Even understanding that, given the fact that the standing of Congress has declined since Iraq has really been on the table in Congress, do you feel like something else should have been done? You could have taken different steps? Or what does it tell you about moving forward?Nancy Pelosi: I believe that we're right on course. We had the votes to say that there are timelines and the President had to honor them. The President vetoed the bill. There isn't much more you can do after that.
But, no, I'm very proud of what we've done in the Congress. I know outside people are dissatisfied. And I am too. . . . But we're right on schedule. . . .
Right on schedule? All you can do? Um, the Founding Fathers would beg to differ. As would President Bush himself.
In Federalist 26, Hamilton wrote:
The legislature of the United States will be obliged, by this provision, once at least in every two years, to deliberate upon the propriety of keeping a military force on foot; to come to a new resolution on the point; and to declare their sense of the matter, by a formal vote in the face of their constituents. They are not at liberty to vest in the executive department permanent funds for the support of an army, if they were even incautious enough to be willing to repose in it so improper a confidence.
Mr. Hamilton, let me introduce you to our current Democratic Congress.
Those who are to conduct a war cannot in the nature of things, be proper or safe judges, whether a war ought to be commenced, continued, or concluded. They are barred from the latter functions by a great principle in free government, analogous to that which separates the sword from the purse, or the power of executing from the power of enacting laws....
Heck, even George Bush knows this:
WSJ: There's a lot of discussion in Congress about putting caps on troop levels or defunding or saying you can't deploy, as commander in chief, troops in Baghdad. Do you think Congress has the constitutional authority . . .GWB: I think they have the authority to defund, use their funding power . . .
WSJ: You do?
GWB: Oh yeah, they can say 'We won't fund.' That is a constitutional authority of Congress. . . .
"Congress, obviously, has to support the effort through the power of the purse, so they have got a role to play and we certainly recognize that," Cheney said. "But also, you cannot run a war by committee."
The current Democratic Congress appears to be ready to abdicate its Constitutional responsibilities. It is shameful.
| < Iraq Update | Feingold Catches Levin In Flip-flop On Funding The Troops > |
