West Virginia Blue
The Best Blogging Community in West Virginia Democratic politics, progressive policies, the good life and free living in Wild, Wonderful West Virginia.
So assuming the War Powers Resolution passes constitutional muster, the way for the Congress to get the American armed forces out of Libya is with a concurrent resolution, which is passed by both houses of Congress. That's important. The reason the War Powers Resolution calls for a concurrent resolution is precisely because it's considered and passed by the entire Congress, which is granted the power to declare war in the Constitution, not just with one house or the other, but the whole thing. Declarations of war, of course, are traditionally made using joint resolutions, which differ from concurrent resolutions in that they are signed by the president. But the War Powers Resolution is all about cutting the president out of the loop (which is why there are such serious constitutional questions about its validity), so naturally the preference was for a resolution passed by the entire Congress, but not dependent on the president's acquiescence.
Boehner's resolution is just a simple House resolution. It won't go to the Senate at all, and thus won't be expressing the voice of the Congress. In addition, there's the simple fact that Kucinich's resolution directs the president to remove U.S. forces from Libya, whereas Boehner's resolution merely demands a stack of reports and that certain documents be turned over to the House. In fact, Boehner's document reads much more like a House subpoena to the executive branch than any sort of direction to the president about what must happen regarding U.S. forces in Libya.
And if you thought the irony of Republicans suddenly insisting on enforcing limitations on a president's powers as "commander in chief" once the president was a Democrat was rich, you'll love seeing them put all their eggs in the Congressional subpoena basket.
You see, the way the demands for the production of documents in the Boehner resolution would be enforced if the Obama administration refuses to give them up is, the House would request that the U.S. Attorney prosecute the responsible officials for contempt of Congress. But as we all recall from the last time we set out on this path, the U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president, and are employees of his executive branch. And not just any employees, but employees with considerable discretion to decide who will and won't be prosecuted.
Yes, there's another alternative to this procedure, and it's called inherent contempt. But of course, that was completely out of the question with Congressional Republicans when the president was himself a Republican.
Copyright 2011 West Virginia Blue
Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
This site exists thanks to financial support from BlogPAC, dedicated volunteers and participation by members of this community. The views expressed at West Virginia Blue belong solely to their respective authors.