Wednesday, June 6, 2012

War Powers Act - quite a topic for someone who frankly has no interest :)


I have totally learned that assigned topics are some of the most exhausting speeches to prepare.  When you aren't interested or passionate about something it's very, very hard to get going.  But I guess that's the point of this whole process so here's what I plan to deliver tonight.  I'm not sure I fully understand The War Powers Act but I've done my best to inform an audience.  Hopefully they don't notice the speaker doesn't give a rats bum ;)


"The War Powers Act is legislation that has been largely ignored by Presidents in the last 40 years.  This has weakened the Presidency and the Congress to the detriment of the Checks and balances of our legislative process."  Throughout this speech I will discuss exactly what the War Powers Act is, why it was created and how it weakens the system when it’s not upheld.

First of all, the War Powers Resolution of 1973 is more commonly known as the War Powers Act.  As stated by ProPublica.org, the law was passed after the United States fought the Korean and Vietnam wars without actual declarations of the war. PearsonHighered.com a renowned source helping educators educate states that the Act was “passed by Congress over President Nixon’s veto to increase congressional control over the executive branch in the foreign policy matters, specifically in regard to military actions short of formally declaring war.  It also states, “Its central provision prohibited the President from engaging in military actions for more than sixty days, unless Congress voted approval.”  The President is also required to inform Congress within 2 days.

To better explain the balance of powers first I did some reading from The Law Library of Congress (loc.gov) it states that war powers of the federal government are divided amongst different branches – the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch.  The current President of the United States has the power as Commander and Chief of the United States armed forces (which includes the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines) while the Congress has the power to make the actual declaration of war and to financially support the armed forces.      

According to TheNewYorkTimes.com, “under the act the President can only send combat troops into battle into areas where “imminent” hostilities are likely.  In my lifetime (the last twenty seven years) only one President has successfully abided by the act to the full extent.  Loc.gov states that “in the wake of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Congress did in fact pass what’s known as “Public Law 107-40 which authorized President George W. Bush to “use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism again the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”

September 11, 2001 became the first time a joint resolution was agreed upon to “authorize for use of Military Force”.  By joint resolution this means the President ant the Congress both agreed that force was indeed necessary and just at that time.

The War Powers Act is legislation that has been largely ignored by Presidents in the last 40 years.  First, President Reagan in 1981 sent military into El Salvador and into a battle that went on for years – violating the timeframe of 60 days.  In 1999 President Clinton ignored the Act during the bombing campaign in Kosovo and more recently in 2011 when President Obama alone approved an attack on Libyan forces.  The recent attack included a mission to enter Osama Bin Laden’s bunker and kill him.  This drawn out mission cost more than 75 million dollars in US funding. 

The War Powers Act has remained a controversial topic for decades because President’s insist it’s unconstitutional, ill-conceived and ineffective.  According Arthur Schlesinger Jr., a well-known historian, the Act is somewhat a “toy handcuff”.  Obama (Senator at the time) quoted “The President does not have the power under the Constitution to authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”  This coming from the same man; now President, who downright ignored seeking congressional approval.  He claims going into Libya with heavily armed military officials wasn’t a war, it’s a piddling was, that we are leading from behind.

This continued disregard of this War Powers Act has weakened the Presidency and the Congress to the detriment of the Checks and balances of our legislative process.  The checks and balance system is in place so that one branch isn’t more powerful than the other.  It balances out not allowing the President to launch ill-advised military action that is unlawful.

With the country in utter chaos… high percentage rates of unemployment, housing market plummeting at rapid speed, more foreclosures and banks unable to recoup funds lost, economic crisis on Wall Street and the price of everything including gas, groceries and even entertainment going up – the last thing we need to do is fight a war that’s not even declared one.  We also need to be sure we’re just in our actions as our actions effect a country and the people fighting to protect it. 

Senator Rand Paul said it best when he quoted to CNN, “to me, it’s the most important debate we’ll ever have… If we’re going to send someone, your son or my son to war, it’s important that it be done properly, and it’s important that if there are constitutional restraints, we obey them”.

Basically the Constitution was created based on compromise from all parties; much like the creation of the War Powers Act.  It’s to the benefit of the entire nation to have both the Commander-in-Chief and the Congress are on the same page and the end result it justified and most importantly authorized by funding and military power together. 

Going forward I think it’s wise to abide the laws of our founding fathers just like every citizen has to in the United States.  When you do something illegal you get arrested and answer to the law.  At some point we all have to answer to someone and no one person, not even the President of the United States, should be able to possess “executive privilege” as once quoted by Richard Nixon during his presidency.  We definitely need to focus on abiding to the Constitution instead of side stepping policies that ultimately effect he lives of many fighting and people paying.  Action should be taken against those who don’t uphold their duties to abide by the Constitution and even the President should be held accountable for his actions.  Otherwise legislation will continue to be side stepped and an example will never bet set to uphold the foundation we were built upon.

I hope this speech has informed you because it sure opened a learning opportunity for me.  I have told you exactly what the War Powers Act is, why it was created and how it weakens the system when it’s not upheld.

Sources:
NYTimes.com.  The New York Times Company.  2012.  4 June 2012.  http://www.nytimes.com/1984/03/29/world/how-war-powers-act-works.html
PearsonHighered.com.  Pearson Education. 2012. 4 June 2012. 
Loc.gov.  The Law Library of Congress.  2012.  4 June 2012.  http://loc.gov/law/help/war-powers.php

No comments:

Post a Comment