House Prepares to Rebuke Obama Over Libya

June 3, 2011 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (12)

President Barack Obama’s notion that he need not consult with Congress over ongoing U.S. military operations in Libya—because, in his words, they were “temporary”—is getting some push back from the House Republicans, who Thursday unveiled a resolution that tries to set things straight.

[See photos of the unrest in Libya.]

The four-part resolution, House Speaker John Boehner said in a release, “establishes that the president has not asked for congressional authorization, and that the Congress has not granted it."

“The American people and members on both sides of the aisle are concerned about questions that have gone unanswered regarding our mission in Libya. The President has failed to explain to the nation how this military action is consistent with U.S. national security goals and policy,” Boehner said, going on to criticize the Obama administration for committing “American resources to enforcing a U.N. resolution that is inconsistent with our stated policy goals and national interests when it comes to removing Muammar Kaddafi from power.” [Vote now: Was Obama right on Libya’s no-fly zone?]

It’s a confrontation that is some time in coming. Since winning election in 2008, Obama has tried to govern the nation from the White House and through the executive branch and so-called independent agencies because his agenda has stalled in Congress. He has managed to win a few important victories—like the passage of his so-called economic stimulus program and the landmark overhaul of the nation’s healthcare financing system, but, overall, he seems to regard the Congress as an impediment to his agenda rather than a constitutional check on his powers.

The resolution, which will be voted on on Friday, also reasserts Congress’s constitutional role on funding, requires the president to provide within 14 days information on the mission that should have been provided from the start, and reaffirms the vote the House took last week saying U.S. troops should not be committed to ground operations in Libya. [Check out a roundup of political cartoons on the Middle East uprisings.]

There is little doubt the measure will pass the House by an overwhelming margin. The real question is how many Democrats will join with the GOP in handing a rebuke to Obama, and what the consequences will be for those who do.

Tags:
Muammar Qadhafi,
Congress,
Libya,
health care reform,
national security terrorism and the military,
John Boehner,
Democratic Party,
White House,
Republican Party

Reader Comments Read all comments (12)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

We get it. Un-American House GOP hate President Obama & want him to fail so they can take back the White House (even if US economy & the American people suffer as a result). It's why GOP blocked 34 Obama bills in 2010, including many jobs bills - they don't care about jobs for the unemployed, they only care about blunting & defunding Obama's recovery policies so they can falsely claim "Obama failed".

Libya is same deal. House GOP let George Bush kill 4,700 American servicemen and lie that it would only cost $50 billion, then blew $3 trillion on his dumb Iraq war... without House GOP rebuke.

But something much more troubling is coming out of Eric Cantor & House GOP which I believe merits a BIG rebuke; from the DOJ. Cantor said "tax cuts are off the table" in the upcoming Debt Ceiling debate & House GOP is treachorously prepared to imperil US & world economies unless they get their way.

Why are tax cuts off the table?

Because it's written in the Constitution that in 2012 US individual & corporate taxes had to stay at lowest rate in 60 years & Congress GOP could NEVER raise taxes, even when it was unreasonable to keep them so low?

No, because House GOP signed Grover Norquist's Anti-Tax Pledge. Grover Norquist is a radical RW aactivist & lobbyist.

By signing Norquist's pledge House GOP relinquished any "freedom" to increase taxes, even in order to generate critical federal revenues, at a time when the nation's economy is in crisis & when a weakened economy is considered a national security risk. They also relinquished "freedom" to honor the terms laid out in Bush Tax Cuts Law, which required the reduced tax rates (designed to pass through 65% of financial benefit to Top 1%-5% richest Americans) to revert to same rates as in Clinton era, when the economy prospered and 25,000,000 jobs were created vs net 3,000,000 under GOP/Bush. Worse stiil, to cover up the fact that the Bush Tax Cuts Law prescribed the return of tax rates to pre-2001 levels, Eric Cantor and House GOP have misled the American public by demagoguing "Obama's Massive Tax Hikes"...

By relinquishing their "freedom" & binding themselves to lobbyist Grover's anti-tax pledge, they openly mocked & rejected their Constitutional Oath of Congressional Office "..to bear true faith and allegiance... that I take this obligation FREELY, without any mental reservation or PURPOSE OF EVASION; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office...".

The Constitution was designed to serve ALL Americans, both rich AND poor, & the 16th Amendment empowers Congress to increase federal taxes. In honoring Norquist's pledge, House GOP agreed to disabuse its Congressional powers and serve only the needs of a small specific group of unidentified special interests represented by the lobbyist...even if to do so endangers the US economy.

House GOP's arrogant refusal to "take taxes off the table" is unconstitutional & an ethical breach of their constitutional oath of office.

Truthbuster of NY 2:51PM June 10, 2011

Ronald Reagan must be rolling over in his grave with all these conservatives defending Muammar Kaddafi over our own. American used to be united in fighting terrorists and horrible dictators like Kaddafi, Reagan's nemesis.

Rocky of ID 12:45AM June 09, 2011

You might want to rethink you statements;

"Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Democrat, called for the withdrawal of all U.S. military support within 15 days. His resolution attracted 148 votes, 87 of which were from Republicans. A second resolution, submitted by House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, passed 268-145, with support from 45 Democrats. The resolution states that authorization for involvement in Libya has been neither requested nor granted, asks the president to provide detailed information on the mission within 14 days and reaffirms that American ground troops should not be sent to Libya."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/3/obamas-nonwar-in-libya/

Yes - it was a Democrat that put forward the stronger resolution calling for an immediate withdrawal, and the Repubs the milder one, just asking for stated justification.

So WHO is interfering with and harassing Obama more?

junior of DC 8:55PM June 06, 2011

Peter Roff

Peter Roff

Peter Roff is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report. Formerly a senior political writer for United Press International, he’s now affiliated with several public policy organizations including Let Freedom Ring, and Frontiers of Freedom. His writing has appeared in National Review, Fox News’ opinion section, The Daily Caller, Politico and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter @PeterRoff.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

JFK's Virtuoso Turn at the Bully Pulpit

Kennedy presented a radical idea: Peaceful coexistence.

Mary Kate Cary

Calling Terrorism What It Is

Refusing to call terrorism by its name helps no one.

Latest Videos

advertisement