For a War Powers Relinquishment Act

Humanist, Sept-Oct, 2004 by Gregory D. Foster

the long presidential election campaign ahead comes at an especially inopportune time for American politicians, particularly those serving in the U.S. Congress. Considering that the United States is embarked on a presidentially proclaimed global war on terrorism without foreseeable end or limits, the members of what poses as the world's greatest deliberative body are in a totally untenable position. To relieve them of the burdensome constitutional responsibility of checking presidential excess, especially in the matter of preemptive war (at the same time that they must troll for votes to perpetuate their stay in office), I offer the following legislative language for a War Powers Relinquishment Act of 2004:

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress that the constitutional checks on exploitation of power by the President of the United States are unnecessary and arduous during a time of war.

Whereas the forthcoming elections are of overriding concern to the members of Congress;

Whereas the unpredictability of voters exerts a chilling effect on the conduct of governance;

Whereas a fundamental premise of republican rule is that the people are inherently unable to govern themselves responsibly because of the volume and volatility of their opinions;

Whereas it therefore is necessary for the people to be represented by others, preferably the rich and wellborn, who possess greater wisdom to discern what needs to be discerned;

Whereas following popular opinion, however, is the safest and surest way for the people's representatives to enjoy the privileges of public office without needlessly suffering the risks of actual position taking;

Whereas popular opinion, reflected in extant polls, overwhelmingly and unreservedly considers the war on terrorism to be going well and favors prompt unilateral military action by the United States;

Whereas the deliberative function of Congress is dangerously thought provoking and time consuming if allowed to operate unconstrained by the imperatives of impatience, appearance, and convenience;

Whereas the concept of checks and balances is a frustrating impediment to swift, decisive action dictated by the urgency of clear and present danger;

Whereas the public, given its characteristic powers of discernment, can be expected to construe support for presidential commitments of U.S. armed forces to hostilities as patriotic courage and opposition as unpatriotic cowardice;

Whereas the Constitution of the United States gives the President unambiguous, unqualified authority to make war whenever and wherever he considers it necessary to do so;

Whereas Presidents and their advisers act always in the national interest, and never for reasons of political expediency or personal advantage;

Whereas the national interest is an unambiguous, objectively determined justification for action, not a rhetorical construction intended to disguise ulterior motives;

Whereas threats to the national interest are commensurately unambiguous and objectively identifiable;

Whereas rogue states alleged to have the potential for weapons of mass destruction are clearly threats to U.S. national interests more serious even than other states of dubious character already known to possess such weapons;

Whereas other states in close proximity to such rogue states are clearly alarmed enough by the impending threat to take courageous concerted action in opposition;

Whereas America's allies are unanimous in their endorsement of unrestrained U.S. action;

Whereas the United States is unchallenged as the world's only superpower and thereby has a responsibility not to be restrained in its use of force, especially against hapless, inept foes;

Whereas the global war on terrorism has been, by any standard, a resounding success and should be expanded to include anyone against whom the United States has a grudge or grievance;

Whereas invading the sovereign territory of a rogue state is an acceptable form of anticipatory self-defense fully consistent with international norms and America's avowed support of the rule of law;

Whereas it is certain that attacking rogue states by force will deter, rather than precipitate, further terrorist attacks against the United States and the use of weapons of mass destruction;

Whereas such an attack clearly will inhibit others who might be similarly tempted from undertaking comparable acts of aggression to suit their own purposes;

Whereas such an attack clearly is part of a coherent U.S. strategy that takes due account of long-term effects and unintended consequences;

Whereas the inevitable clash of civilizations that will define the future state of world affairs may require catalyzing action to guarantee its inevitability and vindicate its proponents;

Whereas the Armed Forces of the United States are universally recognized as an instrument of peace and reassurance rather than of destruction and provocation;

Whereas these same Armed Forces are sufficiently prepared to avoid civilian casualties and prevent becoming casualties themselves in support of unclear aims and stakes: Now, therefore, be it