Unconstitutional War
"Shhh, don't tell anyone but ... We are not really at war! Not officially! "
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 proclaims only "Congress shall have power ... to declare war." Congress has not declared war since WWII. (Interestingly, how many wars have we won since then?)
Since there has been no Constitutional Amendment to grant this power to the President, officially we are not at war.
"So what? Why does it matter who declares war?"
In their wisdom, our Founding Fathers recognized that only when the majority of the nation supports going to war, will the war be given the support of our financial resources, troops, and our resolve to win.
As Congressman Ron Paul said, "Declare war if you want to go war! Go to war, fight it, and WIN IT!"
First, by requiring a majority vote of the House of Representatives, they representing the people, it is expected that they would only send us to war when the majority of the people support the effort.
Second, by requiring a majority vote of the Senate, they representing the interests of the sovereign States (prior to the 17th Amendment – deserving another whole article), they would only send us to war when it was in the interest of the majority of the States.
Third, Article 1, Section 8, Clauses 12-16, along with The Federalist Papers #24-29, explains that:
- the Federal Government has no authority to maintain a standing army, only to raise one (clause 12) when needed by ...
- calling forth the Militia (of the States) (clause 15) which Militia are ...
- under the authority of the States (clause 16).
So, as a third obstacle to going to war, the Federal Government has to ask permission of the States in order to use their Militia in a Federal war. (see also the 2nd Amendment).
Thus, war would only be declared with the approval of both the House and Senate as well as the
support of the
State Governments.
As previously noted, Congress has not declared war since WWII. Since then, we have been involved in many “politically unpopular” wars, none of which were lost due to the superior military might of the enemy. They were lost on the home-front, due to our nation’s lack of resolve to go to war.
Of all the wars since WWII, how many have we won? Just offhand, only the first Gulf War comes to mind. However, some may counter that our current Gulf War is really just a continuation of that war, implying that perhaps we didn’t even win that one, but simply postponed it.
The current Iraq war is a classic example of what happens when the President sends our troops to war without a declaration of war from Congress. Congress is now fighting him at every turn, demanding a time-table for withdrawal, resisting proper funding and troops, and requiring our troops to fight with their hands tied in red tape and political correctness.
As in previous wars, if we do not win this one, it will not be due to superior military might of the enemy. This war will be won or lost on the home-front.
All but one of the Republican Candidates ignore this fact. And though most of the Democratic Candidates oppose the war, none of them have mentioned the Constitution as a reason why.
According to the oath of office every elected official takes, loyalty to the Constitution should be the FIRST reason to oppose the war!
10/14/2002
(This column is nearly identical to last week, although some material has been added. The topic is important and deserves a second look.)
Why Won't Congress Declare War?
Two weeks ago, during a hearing in the House International Relations committee, I attempted to force the committee to follow the Constitution and vote to declare war with Iraq. The language of Article I, section 8, is quite clear: only Congress has the authority to declare war. Yet Congress in general, and the committee in particular, have done everything possible to avoid making such a declaration. Why? Because members lack the political courage to call an invasion of Iraq what it really is- a war- and vote yes or no on the wisdom of such a war. Congress would rather give up its most important authorized power to the President and the UN than risk losing an election later if the war goes badly. There is always congressional "support" for a popular war, but the politicians want room to maneuver if the public later changes its mind. So members take half steps, supporting confusingly worded "authorizations" that they can back away from easily if necessary.
It’s astonishing that the authorization passed by the committee mentions the United Nations 25 times, yet does not mention the Constitution once. Congress has allowed itself to be bypassed completely, even though much is made of the President’s willingness to consult some legislative leaders about the war. The real negotiations took place between the Bush administration and the UN, replacing debate in the people’s house. By transferring its authority to declare war to the President and ultimately the UN, Congress not only violates the Constitution, but also disenfranchises the American people.
Already the administration has sought to gain favor with the UN by pledging hundreds of millions of tax dollars to UNESCO. UNESCO is the anti-American "educational" arm of the UN, an organization from which President Reagan heroically removed us in 1984. Now we find ourselves rejoining the agency to soften UN resistance to our plans in Iraq.
I don’t believe in resolutions that cite the UN as authority for our military actions. America has a sovereign right to defend itself, and we don’t need UN permission or approval to act in the interests of American national security. The decision to go to war should be made by the U.S. Congress alone. If Congress believes war is justified, it should give the President full warmaking authority, rather than binding him with resolutions designed to please our UN detractors.
Sadly, the leadership of both parties on the International Relations committee fails to understand the Constitution. One Republican member stated that the constitutional requirement that Congress declare war is an anachronism and should no longer be followed, while a Democratic member said that a declaration of war would be "frivolous." I don’t think most Americans believe our Constitution is outdated or frivolous, and they expect Congress to follow it.
When Congress issued clear declarations of war against Japan and Germany during World War II, the nation was committed and victory was achieved. When Congress shirks its duty and avoids declaring war, as with Korea, and Vietnam, the nation is less committed and victory is elusive. No lives should be lost in Iraq unless Congress expresses the clear will of the American people and votes yes or no on a declaration of war.
