War Fatigued Congress Refuses to Authorize War in Libya
By Matt Southworth on 06/04/2011 @ 12:59 AM
In the last week, the House has passed five different pieces of legislation on Libya. Last week, Congress appeared united in sentiment about U.S. operations in Libya, easily passing three amendments—ranging from expressing Congress didn’t authorize the mission to no ground troops—to the NDAA last week almost unanimously.
This week, the issue got political. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (OH) introduced H. Con. Res 51 to challenge the President’s authority under section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution. The resolution was scheduled for the House floor on Wednesday 01 June, but House leadership pulled the bill. Speaker of the House Boehner (OH) told Republican colleagues he did not “want to turn the floor over to Dennis Kucinich.” The Kucinich resolution, which would have required the President to withdraw all U.S. assets from the Libyan civil war within 15 days of passage, failed 148-265.
In attempt to counter the Kucinich resolution, Speaker Boehner offered his own, H. Res. 292. The Boehner resolution—which effectively replicated Rep. John Conyers (MI) amendment that passed (416-5) last week—says the administration cannot “deploy, establish, or maintain” troops to Libya. The resolution, which passed 268-145, also explicitly states that “the President has failed to provide Congress with a compelling rationale [for]… activities [in] Libya.”>
No matter the read on motives, it is clear that the House has resoundingly rejected U.S. military action in Libya.
It is presently unclear if the Senate will take up a Boehner style resolution. The Senate does not have to replicate the House efforts for the White House to understand that a third U.S. war is unacceptable. There are currently resolutions both for and against the U.S. action in Libya in the Senate. President Obama has thrown his support behind S. Res. 194, offered by Sens. John McCain (AZ), Carl Levin (MI) and John Kerry (MA), which would authorize U.S. involvement in Libya.
Nevertheless, these votes have come at a time when Congress is clearly showing war fatigue. According to CQ, Chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee Rep. Harold Rogers (KY) questioned “the likelihood of a successful outcome” in Afghanistan, saying “I find it is very difficult to measure with any degree of certainty the progress or lack of progress.” Another House heavyweight, Rep. Norm Dicks (WA), who co-chairs Rep. Roger’s committee, recently said, “I think the American people would overwhelmingly like to see [Afghanistan] brought to a conclusion sooner than 2014. Senator Richard Lugar (IN) has also become an increasingly outspoken critic of both the wars in Afghanistan and Libya.
Bipartisan war fatigue culminated in last week’s near passage of a NDAA amendment offered by Rep. Jim McGovern and Rep. Walter Jones which would have required the President to submit a plan and date certain for ending the war in Afghanistan to Congress. The amendment, based on Rep. McGovern’s H.R. 1735, failed by only 14 votes (204-215)—a considerably better showing than either time the bill was offered in the last two years.
Add it all up: Congress is finally coming around to what we’ve all known for sometime. These wars are bankrupting us—both morally and fiscally—and it is time to bring this treacherous period in U.S. foreign policy to a close.
Comments
Leave a Comment