Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiHow Congress Forgot Its Own Strength
SENATORS Jim Webb of Virginia and Hillary Clinton of New York are right to demand that the president go before Congress to ask for a "declaration of war" before proceeding with an attack against Iran or any other nation. But there is no need for this demand to be put into law, as the two Democrats and their colleagues are seeking to do, any more than there is need for legislation to guarantee our right of free speech or anything else protected by the Constitution.
Article I, Section 8 already provides that only Congress has the power to declare war. Perhaps the founders' greatest concern in writing the Constitution was that they might unintentionally create a president who was too much like the British monarch, whom they despised. They expressed that concern in part by assuring that the president would not have the power to declare war.
Because the Constitution cannot be amended by persistent evasion, this mandate was neither erased nor modified by the actions or inactions of timid Congresses that allowed overeager presidents to start wars in Vietnam and elsewhere without making a declaration.
Indeed, asking for more legislation now would imply that the Constitution doesn't mean what it already says.
It would repeat the mistake made by Congress in 2002 when it tried to delegate to President Bush the non-delegable power that the founders chose to give to the legislative branch. Congress's eagerness to shed the burden making the decision by passing resolutions that purportedly "authorized" the president to decide whether to start a war denied the nation the careful Congressional inquiry intended by the Constitution.
That deliberation might have revealed Iraq's lack of complicity with Al Qaeda and the nonexistence of the country's alleged cache of nuclear weapons. The members of Congress would have had to vote specifically on going to war (instead of on allowing the president to make that decision), which would have assured closer scrutiny than they actually gave the question.
Proceeding with the proposed legislation would also create the likelihood of still another failed Democratic legislative effort, because it would probably not get enough votes from Republicans to override a veto. Such a failure might have some political value as another reminder of the Republicans' eagerness for war, but it would also remind voters that the Democrats have not been as effective as they promised in 2006 they would be.
Congress's refusal to comply with Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution has led to a catastrophic aftermath. Such a tragedy should never be allowed to happen again. Rather than enact new legislation that would create constitutional ambiguity, the Democratic leadership in Congress should assert its strength by simply announcing it will allow no "resolutions" or "authorizations" purporting to delegate to the president Congress's constitutional power to declare war against any other nation. Nor will there be any new war without Congress's solemn deliberation and declaration of war.
The Democrats should go still further and announce that no money will be appropriated for any military action against another nation without a proper declaration of war. And this should be the position of the Democratic presidential candidates as well. How else can they make the case that they are less likely than President Bush to wage dangerous, improvident wars?
Mario M. Cuomo, the governor of New York from 1983 to 1995, practices law with Willkie Farr & Gallagher.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
37 Comments so far
Show AllWhen was the last time Congress, using the word WAR, declared it, 1941. Ever since they have used, every other word but that. Korea "A Police Action" Iraq "Desert Storm"
Iraq, Iraqi Freedom! What term will the Bush Regime use for Iran! It seems Congress and the Bush Regime is full of alot of "Flakes" or is that "Fakes" Norm Chomsky said politicans are no longer elected by there issues, but by Image!, Or is that Propaganda!
Democracy doesn't work. Never has, never will. Congress is not a representative body but a sham cheering section pretending to be an independent branch of government. Silly but necessary to keep the puppet show pretense of a co-equal branch of government. It is doing a good job of that.
Really people, it is time for a new constitution. Enough babbling about the Founding Fathers -- even they would vomit at the thought of keeping this poor thing on life support. It is dead.
Mario Cuomo is exactly right. Congress has shirked its repsonmsiblity to go on the record for or against a war by formally declaring it.
In addition to eroding Congress' powers and subverting the Constitution, sending our servicemen and women into combat without a formal declaration exposes them legally to being charged with war crimes, when there was no imminent threat or formal declaration. Or, if they refuse to obey orders, like Lt. Ehren Watada, their legal status is murky at best and they risk being court martialed and dishonorably discharged for defending the Constitution from domestic enemies who circumvent the Constitution to send servicemen and women into combat without just cause.
Clyde Paige, I think Cuomo didn't run because he's Italian and it's difficult to be Italian without being accused of being in the mob or having mob connections. It's apparently okay for RepubliKlans like Rudy Guiliani because Demz don't engage in so much character assasination as Repugs do. I'm Italian and I know how frequently one gets asked if you are a criminal. Movies and T.V. do so much to reinforce the stale sterotypes, it's difficult to get past that. Have you seen any movies or T.V. shows that don't portray Italians as gangstas? Yes, some get elected on a local basis where people are personally known, but on the national plane where most voters don't get to know the candidate, all the old fears kick in. You pretty much have to be a WASP.
Cuomo should have been president at some point in time. I still wonder why he didn't run-if any of you know please post. I would appricate it
ofmeabes: I agree with Barn Burner in your excellent post.
How many times must we forgive the Democrats for helping the Republicans destroy the Constitution, destroy the three branches of government ( executive, legislative, and judicial ) that are almost indistinguishable from one another any more? And how about the Democrats relinquishing the right of Congress as the only body to declare war? A case can be made that Presidents circumvented Congress ever since 'The Korean Conflict', Vietnam, and every act of military aggression since. So much for "checks and balances" in order to maintain a democracy or a republic, whatever you want to call it.
Progressive people need to abandon this 'two-party' myth and affiliate with other parties like they do in Western Europe. I was a life-long Democrat but switched to the Green Party several years ago. If enough citizens really were interested in changing the destructive path the Republicans and their Democratic collaborators have taken, we can restore what has been taken from us. It DOES take a concerted effort, but well worth the trouble.
If you do have a liberal or progressive Democrat who has voted against the Bush agenda these past six and three-quarters years, then vote for him or her, but make sure you know their voting record,first.
Lobo Gris: Very good comments!
How would you pick a person for nomination for a candidacy? We want competent people, who are also somewhat qualified, trust worthy, and (poor) like us.
How would you do it outside of any of the parties, including Green and Lib etc.???
THE WAR IS OVER!
Mission Accomplished President Bush!
Mission Accomplished GOP Led Congress!
Mission Accomplished General Petraeus!
The Insurgency Is Put Down. The Genocide Is Stopped. Subdividing Iraq Would Only Be A Further Act Of War.
The duly elected government of Iraq (and its Iranian allies) have won.
Saddam Hussein (and the Baath Party) have lost. The United States (and its allies) have lost.
Bring The Troops Home, General Petraeus!
Bring The Troops Home, Congress!
Bring The Troops Home, President Bush!
It reiterates the fact that voters need to throw these morons out of office and install COMPETENT politicians who know how to effectively and efficiently do their jobs! These people would not even know how to run a lemonade stand!
From COMarc:
** Remember, 41 Senators can stop anything. So, 41 Senators could have stopped this and forced a real Declaration of War. There were always more than 41 Democrats. So why didn't they do this. Sen. Byrd was trying. But the DEMOCRATS were perfectly happy with this arrangement. **
And adding to what you say - how much longer do the democrats (and republicans for that matter) think they can keep up this pathetic display??? It seems to me the longer this DC tragedy continues the more grave it will be for all of US. The fact that "OZ's curtain has come down" seems to be permeating out more and more rapidly. We should all recognize that it is in our own self-interest (everyones) to clean the stench emanating from federal DC - otherwise we just keep getting closer and closer to "indiscriminate chaos", although i would be a bit more concerned if i was hoarding a bunch stuff while millions are desperate just to get a daily meal. Man is this crazy or what????
Peace,
Ken Hausle
Charlotte, NC
Of course, being a good Democrat, Mr. Cuoumo tries to spread the myth that this was all just a mistake. That Congress has 'forgotten' its power.
Face it, the Democrats have supported this war from the beginning. If they choose this route, then its because its the most politicially expedient route that does what they want (they wanted the war) while trying to appease their voters, many of whom didn't want the war in the beginning. And which a huge majority doesn't want the war today.
The Democrats are perfectly happy to have a war (that makes their wealthy backers rich) without the responsibility of actually having to vote a Declaration of war. After all, we've already seen the happy feet dance that Mr. Kerry tried to do around this and which Ms. Clinton repeats. The line about 'oh, we authorized the war thinking he wouldn't really use it. we just did it to make the UN move.' Yeah, right. But that's why the DEMOCRATS never insisted on this.
Remember, 41 Senators can stop anything. So, 41 Senators could have stopped this and forced a real Declaration of War. There were always more than 41 Democrats. So why didn't they do this. Sen. Byrd was trying. But the DEMOCRATS were perfectly happy with this arrangement.
97% of our congress is corrupt. They don't give a sh_t about what the people want. They are the best politicians that money can buy.
The average person in our society is much more honest and decent than the average congress person or senator.
The world has many problems, the bastards in Washington are behind more than half of them.
And yes, the Bill of Rights barley got accepted, and has been under fire ever since its creation. It's been 15,000 years and a slow march towards true civilized freedom.
Well, one safegaurd is communication. How many people have you pursuaded to read Common Dreams? (I've only got 3, so yeah it's not easy)
To Common Dreams: would you please put some counters up for site-visits, article-visits, posters, members, donors, and writes/publishers. I like this site, and wish to help more people to it.
PaulMauriceMartin October 8th, 2007 9:12 am
"The fundamental problem, I think, is that any system can be undermined by people who manage to get into power and are determined to do so. There's no foolproof system. Even the best requires being run by people who are genuinely committed to it."
It's never foolproof when those in power consider the Constitution to be just a ***damned piece of paper.
Lobo Gris
We are no longer a government of laws, and the Constitution has been rendered inoperative by our current rulers. All three branches are corrupted irredeemably, and it is time for the people to dissolve this government and take the law into their own hands.
This is but a symptom of a much larger problem in the U.S. The Congress has not only abrogated their duty to declare war when the U.S. enters armed conflict, they have abrogated their duty to regulate commerce by illegally turning authority over to the WTO. They have passed a law, the Patriot act, that violates the 4th amendment to the Constitution and denies prisoners the right of habeas corpus in violation of Article 1, section 9. They have violated both the Geneva convention and the 8th amendment to the constitution which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment by holding prisoners without trial or charges, and ignoring their being tortured. They have allowed the violation of the separation of church and state by allowing Bush to enact his faith based initiative. They have allowed the violation of the 5th and 6th amendments by not challenging the illegal imprisonment of Jose Padilla, an American citizen, in a military brig without charges being filed or a trial being held.
And most important, they have failed in their duty to impeach an out of control President who has engaged in a multitude of egregious acts in violation of the law, the Constitution, and foreign treaties.
Lobo Gris
rtdrury - thanks.
I especially appreciated this section of your post: "We shift all individual exchange/association to the local community, and thereby bring back the cottage industries and craftsman guilds. And we enjoy the fruits of our own labor....."
If this could be realized coupled with utilization of "appropriate technology" (google this term if interested), imagine how the quality of life could be so enhanced.
Peace,
Ken Hausle
Ken Hausle, declaring independence from the capitalist establishment is a great idea. To implement both individually and collectively, we regularly notify the capitalists that their "second gilded age" is now over. We shift all individual exchange/association to the local community, and thereby bring back the cottage industries and craftsman guilds. And we enjoy the fruits of our own labor, and the many other benefits of self-determination. This shrinks all the power centers, including the federal government, into the little shrimps that they deserve to be. It's not the whole answer, but it's a start.
The wars we're fighting now would be either over already or greatly curtailed if we had enacted income tax surcharges to pay for them in real time. The same is true of any action against IRAN.
The notion that "America is not at war. The Army and Marines are at war. America is at the mall." could not be more true. The Democrats need not be so anti-war. All they need to do is INSIST that wars be paid for in real time by the top 20% of income earners, starting right now. That'll do it, and the House holds the cards in the budgeting. They needn't de-fund and be accused of "cut and run", or accused of "wasting" the American lives lost so far. All they need to do is be both pro-war and pro-tax at the same time and not appropriate without the corresponding tax increase.
Republicans do not care about anything but tax cuts, and this axiom could easily be proven this fall.
It's been amazing to me how an administration determined to get around the balance of powers has been able to do so. All this time I thought we had a great system. We do, but not as great as I thought.
The fundamental problem, I think, is that any system can be undermined by people who manage to get into power and are determined to do so. There's no foolproof system. Even the best requires being run by people who are genuinely committed to it.
"How Congress Forgot It's Own Strength"?
Come on Mario, read "The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy" by Mersheimer and Walt.
Congress hasn't forgotten anything. They've been bought.
As a non-American, I understand what you mean, Ronald White. I know what Americans SHOULD do, but it's sorta difficult to preach if you don't have to make the same sacrifices yourself.
However, fifty years of America-watching has taught me that ordinary Americans usually do the right thing -- with or without advice from neighbours. It just requires that American anger reach a critical mass. I think that moment may be approaching.
They have not forgot their power. They have sold it to the highest bidder. AIPAC and the Corporate lobbyists rule them. The working class which make up the bulk of their constituents are increasingly irrelevant. Most of them don't vote, and those who do are the critters who rely on the 30 second commercials to decide who to vote for, and in a close race, well, caging and hacking into the voting machines help control the outcome.
Or it may be that those Anthrax attacks that targeted Dems and the MSM scared the crap out of them, that was a home grown terrorist attack that no one talks about anymore. Probably a combination of the 2.
The last possibility is they know 9/11 was done or assisted by elements within government, and using their power to stop the President could trigger another 9/11. Also, those who would commit such a heinous crime, well, there probably is not much they would not do to prevent it from being exposed, hey, whats one less Senator, etc. I prefer not to believe this possibility. But if we do Iran I might reconsider it, and it does tie in to the anthrax attacks.
How is the World Ruled & how do wars start?
Diplomats tell lies to journalists & then believe what they read.
(Karl Kraus, Austrian Press,1874-1936)
General Eisenhower's warnings concerning the dangers of the military industrial complex were preceded by Albert Einstein in 1932 when he cited munition makers as the main thrust for war machines. Warnings concerning the need to scrutinize such misadventures by the executive branch had earlier been made by John Adams and other constitutional framers.
Unfortunately this war is an example of the neglect and/or ignorance of pertinent history, along with the profiteering motives. Such misguided disasters can occur only when a compliant & apathetic populace allows their legislators to tolerate these types of abuses from arrogant and unlearned administrations guided by special interests.
American citizens should not be critisizing their respective congressmen/women for not demanding a NOW ending of the occupation when they ignore or shy away from a sure-fire strategy to end occupation and that is to publicly encourage ALL military due for deployment to desert,then financially support them and take the inevitable heat for daring to say such un-American things.
All other essays are so much hot air
Then again , I truly sympathize with Americans ; advocating desertion would land you up in Guantanamo or worse.
The Bush team routinely intiminates those who disagree or question their policies by branding them unpatriotic or worse. Their assaults against those who question the logic of continuing the course in Iraqis a continuation of that prctice. Now that the opposition has fired back, with the critiques of General Petrous,s assessment, they cry foul.
> No assult from the liberal wing or press can match the unprecedented character assassinations against Senator Max Cleland, a decorated triple amputee Viet Vet with an honorable senate record. These assaults were in response to Sen Cleland's sponsorship of an investigation into the causes of 9/11, which was opposed by Bush. Among other things, they displayed his picture with Bin Laden and falsely demeaned his war record, even blaming him for stepping on the mine. With these crude tactics they succeeded in unseating Sen Cleland by one who shunned military service, & was compatible to Bush's secretive policies.
Despite its degree of deception & importance, a critique of that abuse was avoided by the mainstream media. No republican has even expressed remorse for it.> The most alarming aspect of these horrific intimination tactics is not their methodology--but their successes.
Blame falls on apathetic & gullible voters who succumb to such rhetoric; and our legislators for allowing themselves to be intimidated into permitting this reckess zealot to impose such damage to our nation and the world.
I don't say this facetiously -- the question now is: how does federal DC want to go down?
The unknown is: how long will it take.
But the reality is: this is going to happen eventually. It could be peaceful and it could be otherwise. There may be little suffering or there could be unimaginable suffering.
I'm hoping for the peaceful route, but who knows????
Peace,
Ken Hausle
Many citizens were hopeful that the new Congress would take the strong steps needed to investigate many troubling situations.
There has been some progress, as Cuomo indicates. Yet, as he also says, more needs to be done.
Food for thought in the articles ...
"Congressional inquiries on Iraq War can enhance honor and strength of America"" (November 9, 2006)
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=16328
"New Congress must conduct necessary inquiries and investigations properly" (October 19, 2006)
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=15108
This is why if this federal government has any semblance of reality remaining, impeachment is the only concrete option for possible recourse and remedy. The thing is, this has been so obvious for so long it now is obvious that it is not going to happen (or at least it seems that way to me).
So where does that leave the "united states": ????????????????????? who "wishes" they knew??? With respect to "america", i have already declared my independence and i declare it again. I know it is just me rambling on, but i'm serious --- i declare independence from america and from all those institutions and organizations that are premised on domination.....
The challenge now is just figuring out how to go about implementing independence individually and dare i say collectively....
Band-aids will not work for this national injury.
Ken Hausle
Charlotte, NC
Here is the best report I've found on the anti-Iran propaganda campaign for war.
IRAN'S REVOLUTIONARY GUARD BRANDED "TERRORISTS"
Pepe Escobar says, "It's all about regime change in Iran"
http://therealnews.com/c.php?c=071006A&i=491
Mr. Cuomo, I'm afraid you don't understand the depth of fear the Democrats have of being made to look like pansies. The result is that they still look like pansies, but at least they "support our troops".
So while they are caving in to a magnet slogan, our entire democracy is being pulled out from under us. But let's say they do hitch up their trousers and say "no more war money without a declaration of war!" Then the Republicans will call their bluff, offer a declaration of war, and dare the Democrats to show how they hate America by voting nay. It will sail through, the funding will follow, and once more the Democrats will be left wondering how they got duped again. And we will be stuck with another interminable and unwinnable war--all nice and legal.
Dear ofmelabes,
A very good post and astute understanding of history. As I am sure you know this whole cold war thing got traction when Harry Truman allowed a petty stand-in for the ambassador to China send a memo warning of a soviet threat to attack Western Europe to be used as an excuse to rebuild our war machine to save the aircraft industry which was hemoraging dollars after WW2. They had a huge infrastructure that had been subsidized by the Government during the war and domestic flying did not take off as they had forecast. Truman needed their support for the Marshall plan that was not popular in Congress so the unholy union was formed and the arms race followed. So Presidents have always manipulated Congress but until now no President has been able to make Congress a rubber stamp.
If we do not impeach Bush, Cheney and the rest of the Neocons who gave us this worse than useless "war on terror," we're going to make Americans sorry for generations to come---for what kind of acts could possibly constitute grounds for impeachment if not those of Bush and his criminals? Having grown up under Nixon and his war, I feel sick every day that Pelosi and other DNC elitists think of nothing but their own gain in the face of Bush's insults to the Constitution, for which my family also fought and died...
"I would call that empty propaganda," Mr Bush said. "Evidently, there's a lot of gossip … that try to scare people about me personally or my country or what we stand for."
"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda," Bush said.
"In an interview after his appearance before a congressional panel on Monday, General Petraeus strongly implied that it would soon be necessary to obtain authorisation to take action against Iran within its own borders, rather than just inside Iraq. "There is a pretty hard look ongoing at that particular situation" he said.
maxpayne, Mario Cuomo was always and continues to be a coward. The truth is that the Congress always MISused its strength regardless of which party controlled it. From 1980s up to today, the Congress has knowingly MISused its strength on the wrong matters but when it counted always failed. Even the supposedly liberal blogosphere is brain-damaged when it comes to understanding what makes Congress what it is. If Cuomo even understood the meaning of forgot, he would understand that you can't forget something if you didn't bother to remember it in the first place. Congress never bothered to remember to use its strength where it counted. The only thing that gets them are money bags from the lobbyists and special interests.
Frederick Johnson,
Spartanburg, SC
I believe that all Washington politicians are "contaminated" by the conventional wisdom of the media-political-military-industrial-ex cold war establishment. By the 1940's it was clear to Roosevelt and Willkie that we are living in "One World," to use the 1940 Republican candidate for President's book titile, Roosevelt hoped to get away from diasatrous imperialist struggles such as WWI and WWII, by creating the UN as a medium in which consensus could be mediated without war. After his death, with the US the dominant economic world power and with a belief in a superiority in atomic weaponry it returned to a struggle for geopolitical control. Eisenhower mentioned the "military indusrial complex" as a special interest, but anti communism and "national security" have been convenient issues for politicians going back to the French Revolution, and while no Russian politician could countenance German rearmament after what Germany had done to them in the 1940's, or find it easy to return countries they have conquered with Russian blood to hostile imterests, it did not mean that Stalin wanted to take over Wetern Europe. His attitude to Western Communists parties was to treat them as tools, preferably paid tools, serving his personal aims. After he died the time had come in which a reasonable accommodation in the spirit of Roosevelt and Willkie could have been worked out for a positive world policy that would have obviated the cold war -- such a policy was advocated by Stevenson in the 1952 and 1956 campaigns. JFK, however, couldn't stand Stevenson -- he was going to be like Churchill versus Hitler in the struggle against international communism, and the Democratic party has never recovered from that fatal error. The only thing that can really save us is a candidate who knows the Washington mess well but has established himself as free from it and as a leader who understands that the problems that will affect us most are above all planetary and apply to the people of all nations --- not just global warming but also the destruction of the oceanic habitat, of species, general pollution, and the world economy. The world expenditures on "security" and "national interests" benefit the special interests and the politicians they support in every nation, and only a fraction of the available capital and other resources is devoted to the needs of people. Only Al Gore can give a new vision to the American public that could get the US to lead the world to working for the needs of the world's people. The primaries put all the emphasis on "issues" that are defined in various local ways for getting votes -- the primaries should be made irrelevant -- no single Democrat can expect to wiin it all. THE CANDIDATES SHOULD NOT RELEASE THEIR DELEGATES AND THE CONVENTION SHOULD PICK THE DEMOCRATICK NOMINNEE. It would almost be like the nomination of George Washington, a nominnee who does not need the job but is in a position to lead his country, and the world, away from the wars and other military struggles, the conomic inequities, etc, that have plagued us since the beginning of the cold war. GORE FOR PRESIDENT.
Thanks Mario for your thoughts. I wished you would have thought about being brave before LOSING in 1994. By the way, you should read Bill Press's "USE IT OR LOSE IT" article here on this site. Better yet, a google search for "use it or lose it" and "bill press" should help you out. Frankly though, this current Congress is hell bent on LOSING it all despite the trouble we voters and grassroots efforts made to get these wimpy pansies into office !