I heard some great news ! Congressman DeFazio Fourth Congressional District, Oregon has introduced legislation requiring the President to seek authorization before any attack on Iran. The resolution,H Con Res. 391 is supported by 26 other members of Congress (the co-sponsors can be found on the link)
Thomas doesn’t link directly. click home page, enter HCR391, click the BILL NUMBER option, then search.
Promoted by Steven D.
This is a critical moment on two critical issues. First, Democrats have to get out in front of the administration’s beating of the wardrum. We’ve seen this movie before, and it has not had a pretty ending. The fear-mongering has already begun, and it is taking hold. A recent CNN survey showed that Iran’s nuclear program is now in second place, at 33% of respondents, as the most important issue facing America. The threat is being exaggerated. The need to act urgently is being grossly overstated. There is no reason to take any action other than diplomatic for at least a year, and certainly not before the mid-terms. The Democratic leadership and the rank and file have to meet this head on, making it very clear that this is a political maneuver, having nothing to with American security. This should not be difficult to do. Time Magazine has reported that Presidential advisers believe that by putting pressure on Iran, Bush may be able to rehabilitate himself on national security, a core strength that has been compromised by a discouraging outlook in Iraq. “In the face of the Iranian menace, the Democrats will lose,” said a Republican frequently consulted by the White House.
Second, the bill contains the clear statement that the administration has been flouting the law and the Constitution, and reasserts Congressional authority over the President’s warmaking powers.
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That Congress–
(1) strongly believes initiating military action without congressional approval in response to Iran’s nuclear program does not fall within the President’s `Commander-in-Chief’ powers under the Constitution;
(2) rejects any suggestion that Public Law 107-40, the authorization of force resolution approved in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, explicitly or implicitly, extends to authorizing military action against Iran over its nuclear program;
(3) rejects any suggestion that Public Law 107-243, the authorization of force resolution approved by Congress to go to war with Iraq, explicitly or implicitly, extends to authorizing military action against Iran over its nuclear program; and
(4) strongly and unequivocally believes that seeking congressional authority prior to taking military action against Iran is not discretionary, but is a legal and constitutional requirement.
This comes at an especially important moment, because
1) there has finally been a breakthrough in the traditional media on this question in the Boston Globe last weekend.
2) Specter may finally have noticed that the administration has declared the separation of powers to be null and void. There will be no progress on Congressional oversight or Judicial review without Republican support. Specter’s apparent realization that the House and the Senate themselves are threatened may be the first critical crack in the Republican monolith. Specter to schedule hearings
:
The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, accusing the White House of a ”very blatant encroachment” on congressional authority, said yesterday he will hold an oversight hearing into President Bush’s assertion that he has the power to bypass more than 750 laws enacted over the past five years.
”There is some need for some oversight by Congress to assert its authority here,” Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, said in an interview. ”What’s the point of having a statute if . . . the president can cherry-pick what he likes and what he doesn’t like?”
Specter said he plans to hold the hearing in June. He said he intends to call administration officials to explain and defend the president’s claims of authority, as well to invite constitutional scholars to testify on whether Bush has overstepped the boundaries of his power.
Nothing could be more damaging to US foreign policy than the use of a nuclear weapon in a “pre-emptive” war. It would mean the end to the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty, and would create an enormous incentive for other countries to pursue nuclear capability. However, as DeFazio made clear, a conventional war on a blatantly trumped-up pretext would be nearly as damaging.
“The last thing we need is another Iraq,” Congressman DeFazio said. “My resolution reminds the president to follow federal law and Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, which requires authorization from Congress before taking military action against Iran. Members of the House of Representatives have been elected by their constituents to participate in major decisions like initiating military strikes against other countries, and it is an injustice to the American people to deny them that prerogative.”
H. Con. Res. 391 in no way weakens our national security, and it is vital in reclaiming our freedom under the Constitution, nor does it conflict with of the Iran Freedom Support Act. This resolution would send a clear message of the seriousness with which all Americans, as did the Founding Fathers, regard strong congressional and our tri-partite system of governance.
This resolution is the first formal opportunity your elected officials have had to put down their collective foot, and demand the president comply with the Constitution. It’s also an opportunity to make very clear to the administration that we will not be fooled into another war with cherry-picked intelligence and fear-mongering disinformation. We need to stop this war from happening. We need to take back the Constitution.
Please contact your Member of Congress person, your Senators, write LTEs, and call local talk radio. We have to get in front of this story, before the supine media again assumes its role as the administration’s publicist. The public needs to hear about these issues. H Con Res 391 provides the frame we need to do so.
cross posted @ kos all attention and/or recommend is appreciated. spread the word.
The co-sponsors are
Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1]
Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2]
Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3]
Brown, Sherrod [OH-13]
Capuano, Michael E. [MA-8]
Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14]
Doggett, Lloyd [TX-25]
Fattah, Chaka [PA-2]
Hinchey, Maurice D. [NY-22]
Holt, Rush D. [NJ-12]
Honda, Michael M. [CA-15]
Inslee, Jay [WA-1]Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18]
Kilpatrick, Carolyn C. [MI-13]
Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10]
Larson, John B. [CT-1]
Lee, Barbara [CA-9]
Lewis, John [GA-5]
McCollum, Betty [MN-4]
McDermott, Jim [WA-7]
McGovern, James P. [MA-3]
Millender-McDonald, Juanita [CA-37]
Miller, George [CA-7]
Oberstar, James L. [MN-8]
Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10]
Sanders, Bernard [VT]
Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9]
Serrano, Jose E. [NY-16]
Watson, Diane E. [CA-33]
