How about we get Congress to take back its war powers?

[BrewerJohn]

As long as we're talking about proposing bills that can't get passed in the present atmosphere as a
fake-out to start a national conversation, why not try something that not only needs to be talked
about, but really does need to be passed at some point.

We absolutely need to get the sole authority to declare war back in the hands of Congress, as the
Constitution provides. That, more than anything else, is what will rid us of more imperial adventures
instigated by some "advisers"--people who nobody voted for and are accountable to none--to some
future Thug-in-Chief who somehow manages to slither into office.

Get it back in the hands of those who are directly accountable to the people, and make it clear when
the question comes before them what it really is they are voting on. No more IWR shell games.

It will take a while, but start talking about it now. That's a conversation-starter I can get behind 100%.

[sal paradise]

1. I agree with you whole heartedly...

and you're right, that isn't something that will happen immediately, especially since its much more difficult to pass legislation in the Senate than the House, even with the upcoming switch of power. However, I agree that a piece of legislation putting war power back into the hands of Congress would be a monumental and great change in our government and the world.

[mike_c]

2. this issue is not as clear cut as you seem to think it is....

First, let me say that I agree with you on your two major points-- the authority to declare war should rest solely with Congress and Congress should seek an answer the the underlying separation of powers issue.

That being said, I urge you to research the matter some more-- the debate is not simple. The Constitution also gives the president sole authority over the military as commander-in-chief. The interpretation of how authority is separated and what specific authority is vested with each branch of federal government has been argued vigorously. Both sides have presented compelling arguments for their views. I happen to agree with the interpretation that while the President commands the army, he or she does not have the constitutional authority to take the nation to war-- in that sense the president serves the will of the nation as expressed through the Congress. BUT the question remains unresolved. The judicial branch has never ruled on the matter, so neither Congress nor the executive have a clear understanding of the limits of their authority.