[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
War, War, War See other War, War, War Articles Title: How The Senate Was Bait And Switched Into War Last week, minutes after President Barack Obama explained to the nation why he took the country to war, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) posted a statement on YouTube first noting Obamas 2007 claim that The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation and then adding: Unfortunately, President Obama has failed to heed his own advice. He has ignored our constitution and engaged us in a military conflict without congressional debate and approval. But the day before on This Week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told ABC News Jake Tapper: The United States Senate called for a no-fly zone in the resolution that it passed on March 1st. So who is right? Did the president go to war without any approval from the Senate, as Sen. Paul says? Or did the Senate approve the presidents use of military force, as Secretary Clinton claims? The answer involves a secretive Senate procedure known as hotlining. Hotlining is a system that allows legislation to pass by unanimous consent, usually in the evening, when almost no Senators are present. Prior to a bills consideration, the Democrat and Republican Cloakrooms send out hotline notices automated phone calls and emails to key staff. The hotline notices typically include the bill number, so members can look it up and review its contents. However, in the case of the Libya, the resolution was not made public until the day after the Senate approved it. According to numerous congressional aides, almost no members knew about the no-fly zone language. Most offices thought they were approving a different resolution with the same sponsor and a nearly identical title that had been circulating among congressional offices for two weeks. In a February 22, email obtained by the Examiner, an aide to Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) sent a resolution to the staff of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee condemning human rights abuses in Libya. There was no mention of a no-fly zone. On March 1st, at 4:03pm, a different resolution was hotlined. The only information provided in the hotline email was the title: S. Res. __ A resolution strongly condemning the gross and systematic violations of human rights in Libya, including violent attacks on protesters demanding democratic reforms, and for other purposes. But what Senate offices did not know was that the sponsors had secretly slipped into the resolution the following sentence: [the Senate] urges the United Nations Security Council to take such further action as may be necessary to protect civilians in Libya from attack, including the possible imposition of a no-fly zone over Libyan territory Most staff assumed the hotline referred to the previous draft, and had no reason to place a "hold" on a resolution condemning Libya Human Rights abuses. At 6:30 pm, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) took to a near empty chamber, and introduced the brand new resolution and asked that it be approved without debate or vote. By 6:31, the resolution was passed. The resolution is non-binding and has no force of law, but that did not stop pro-war Senators from rushing out to claim that the Senate had just approved military action: There is a bipartisan consensus building to provide assistance to liberated areas of Libya and to work with our allies to enforce a no-fly zone," a Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) statement released that night read. Senators more skeptical of military action where the United States has no national interest felt deceived. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) tells The Examiner: "Clearly, the process was abused. You don't use a hotline to bait and switch the country into a military conflict. There is no more difficult decision than whether to put our men and women in uniform in harm's way. With no imminent threat to the national security of the United States, the President should have asked for authorization and Congress should have had a thorough debate. Sen. Paul is not giving up without a fight. Last Wednesday he introduced an amendment to a small business bill that would adopt then-candidate Obamas 2007 statement above as the sense of the Senate. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) shut down the entire Senate to avoid debating the issue. But Sen. Pauls motion is till the pending business of the Senate. With Senate action needed to avoid a government shutdown next week, Paul, and the American people, may just yet get a debate on military action in Libya.
Poster Comment: "Did the president go to war without any approval from the Senate, as Sen. Paul says?" What Sen. Paul said is: "without congressional debate and approval." The Senate isn't a stand alone Congress, nor does it have the power to independently launch wars/no-fly zones/no shipping-zones/no drive-zones/no walk-zones by Resolution.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top Page Up Full Thread Page Down Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
#1. To: GreyLmist (#0)
I am beginning to think we should all visit our our representatives home offices and destroy them. It's obvious they don't need them... We are not listened too and their actions and INactions are killing us...quite literally. A three front war.... Fuck this...I remember my history.. I know what Nazi Germany did and damnit to hell the USA is echoing their road to hell and if we don't stop it another nation will...in the worst ways.
#2. To: titorite (#1)
A three front war.... Fuck this...I remember my history.. I know what Nazi Germany did and damnit to hell the USA is echoing their road to hell and if we don't stop it another nation will...in the worst ways. I agree with every word - times a trillion !
Top Page Up Full Thread Page Down Bottom/Latest |
||
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|