SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) is crafting a new AUMF as an alternative to the measure put forth by his colleagues in the Senate Foreign Committee. (Photo: Senate Democrats/flickr/cc)
As Corker-Kaine AUMF Denounced as 'Recipe for Disaster,' Merkley Proposes Plan to Curb President's War Powers
"The way to stop endless #ForeverWar is not for Congress to abandon its constitutional responsibility."
May 17, 2018
Anti-war advocates and progressive national security experts are praising Sen. Jeff Merkley's (D-Ore.) challenge to a proposed Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that critics warn would expand the executive branch's military authority and "further entrench the United States in endless war."
Ahead of a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Wednesday to discuss an AUMF proposal introduced last month by Sens. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Merkley, a member of the committee, released a statement teasing his forthcoming alternative proposal--a move that was celebrated online:
Merkley thanked those "who have pushed to renew this critical debate," acknowledging that the AUMF that followed the 9/11 terrorist attacks "has been stretched beyond recognition by three consecutive administrations," but emphasized that he has "fundamental concerns with the approach laid out in the AUMF the committee will be considering."
"The framers of our Constitution did not intend for the president to have unchecked powers to wage war," Merkley added. "They gave the power to declare war to Congress."
The senator said he plans to introduce an AUMF that:
- maintains Congress's constitutional role in authorizing war;
- requires congressional authorization for expanded military action;
- limits the use of U.S. ground forces;
- establishes a 3-year sunset;
- adheres to international law;
- requires transparency; and
- repeals the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs.
In addition to Merkley, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.)--the only member of Congress to vote against the 2001 AUMF--have announced their opposition to the Corker-Kaine AUMF (pdf), which would replace the 2001 AUMF and repeal the 2002 AUMF, but also grant the executive branch "uninterrupted authority to use all necessary and appropriate force in the current and continuing armed conflict against the Taliban, al Qaeda, ISIS, and associated forces."
Although the Corker-Kaine AUMF claims it "establishes rigorous congressional over- sight and improves transparency," anti-war advocates and critical lawmakers believe the measure would effectively be "another blank check" to the president to wage war worldwide.
Lee and Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) on Wednesday sent a letter (pdf) signed by more than 50 members of Congress to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to demand that any new military authorization include a sunset clause or mandatory reauthorization; repeal the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs; be tailored so it is "mission-specific"; and include provisions to promote transparency and accountability.
"The Senate needs to go back to the drawing board," Lee declared. "While I support a robust debate on any new AUMF, I fear that the Corker-Kaine proposal would further limit congressional oversight of our perpetual wars."
"Replacing one blank check with another even broader one," she concluded, "is a recipe for disaster."
Anti-war activists continue to issue similar declarations:
A group of organizations including the ACLU, Brennan Center for Justice, Peace Action, Public Citizen, and Win Without War, also sent a letter to the committee on Wednesday, warning that the Corker-Kaine measure "is likely to cause lasting and colossal harm to the U.S. Constitution, lead to irreversible damage to civil liberties and human rights at home and abroad, gravely harm U.S. national security and prosperity, and cede breathtaking and unnecessary powers to the president without any meaningful gains in transparency or oversight."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Anti-war advocates and progressive national security experts are praising Sen. Jeff Merkley's (D-Ore.) challenge to a proposed Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that critics warn would expand the executive branch's military authority and "further entrench the United States in endless war."
Ahead of a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Wednesday to discuss an AUMF proposal introduced last month by Sens. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Merkley, a member of the committee, released a statement teasing his forthcoming alternative proposal--a move that was celebrated online:
Merkley thanked those "who have pushed to renew this critical debate," acknowledging that the AUMF that followed the 9/11 terrorist attacks "has been stretched beyond recognition by three consecutive administrations," but emphasized that he has "fundamental concerns with the approach laid out in the AUMF the committee will be considering."
"The framers of our Constitution did not intend for the president to have unchecked powers to wage war," Merkley added. "They gave the power to declare war to Congress."
The senator said he plans to introduce an AUMF that:
- maintains Congress's constitutional role in authorizing war;
- requires congressional authorization for expanded military action;
- limits the use of U.S. ground forces;
- establishes a 3-year sunset;
- adheres to international law;
- requires transparency; and
- repeals the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs.
In addition to Merkley, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.)--the only member of Congress to vote against the 2001 AUMF--have announced their opposition to the Corker-Kaine AUMF (pdf), which would replace the 2001 AUMF and repeal the 2002 AUMF, but also grant the executive branch "uninterrupted authority to use all necessary and appropriate force in the current and continuing armed conflict against the Taliban, al Qaeda, ISIS, and associated forces."
Although the Corker-Kaine AUMF claims it "establishes rigorous congressional over- sight and improves transparency," anti-war advocates and critical lawmakers believe the measure would effectively be "another blank check" to the president to wage war worldwide.
Lee and Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) on Wednesday sent a letter (pdf) signed by more than 50 members of Congress to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to demand that any new military authorization include a sunset clause or mandatory reauthorization; repeal the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs; be tailored so it is "mission-specific"; and include provisions to promote transparency and accountability.
"The Senate needs to go back to the drawing board," Lee declared. "While I support a robust debate on any new AUMF, I fear that the Corker-Kaine proposal would further limit congressional oversight of our perpetual wars."
"Replacing one blank check with another even broader one," she concluded, "is a recipe for disaster."
Anti-war activists continue to issue similar declarations:
A group of organizations including the ACLU, Brennan Center for Justice, Peace Action, Public Citizen, and Win Without War, also sent a letter to the committee on Wednesday, warning that the Corker-Kaine measure "is likely to cause lasting and colossal harm to the U.S. Constitution, lead to irreversible damage to civil liberties and human rights at home and abroad, gravely harm U.S. national security and prosperity, and cede breathtaking and unnecessary powers to the president without any meaningful gains in transparency or oversight."
Anti-war advocates and progressive national security experts are praising Sen. Jeff Merkley's (D-Ore.) challenge to a proposed Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that critics warn would expand the executive branch's military authority and "further entrench the United States in endless war."
Ahead of a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Wednesday to discuss an AUMF proposal introduced last month by Sens. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Merkley, a member of the committee, released a statement teasing his forthcoming alternative proposal--a move that was celebrated online:
Merkley thanked those "who have pushed to renew this critical debate," acknowledging that the AUMF that followed the 9/11 terrorist attacks "has been stretched beyond recognition by three consecutive administrations," but emphasized that he has "fundamental concerns with the approach laid out in the AUMF the committee will be considering."
"The framers of our Constitution did not intend for the president to have unchecked powers to wage war," Merkley added. "They gave the power to declare war to Congress."
The senator said he plans to introduce an AUMF that:
- maintains Congress's constitutional role in authorizing war;
- requires congressional authorization for expanded military action;
- limits the use of U.S. ground forces;
- establishes a 3-year sunset;
- adheres to international law;
- requires transparency; and
- repeals the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs.
In addition to Merkley, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.)--the only member of Congress to vote against the 2001 AUMF--have announced their opposition to the Corker-Kaine AUMF (pdf), which would replace the 2001 AUMF and repeal the 2002 AUMF, but also grant the executive branch "uninterrupted authority to use all necessary and appropriate force in the current and continuing armed conflict against the Taliban, al Qaeda, ISIS, and associated forces."
Although the Corker-Kaine AUMF claims it "establishes rigorous congressional over- sight and improves transparency," anti-war advocates and critical lawmakers believe the measure would effectively be "another blank check" to the president to wage war worldwide.
Lee and Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) on Wednesday sent a letter (pdf) signed by more than 50 members of Congress to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to demand that any new military authorization include a sunset clause or mandatory reauthorization; repeal the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs; be tailored so it is "mission-specific"; and include provisions to promote transparency and accountability.
"The Senate needs to go back to the drawing board," Lee declared. "While I support a robust debate on any new AUMF, I fear that the Corker-Kaine proposal would further limit congressional oversight of our perpetual wars."
"Replacing one blank check with another even broader one," she concluded, "is a recipe for disaster."
Anti-war activists continue to issue similar declarations:
A group of organizations including the ACLU, Brennan Center for Justice, Peace Action, Public Citizen, and Win Without War, also sent a letter to the committee on Wednesday, warning that the Corker-Kaine measure "is likely to cause lasting and colossal harm to the U.S. Constitution, lead to irreversible damage to civil liberties and human rights at home and abroad, gravely harm U.S. national security and prosperity, and cede breathtaking and unnecessary powers to the president without any meaningful gains in transparency or oversight."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.