Bush has described himself as “the Decider” and now “the Decision Maker.” Kathleen folded that into “the Decisioner,” but Ariel then came up with one I like even better: The Decisionator.
But here’s my question: Is he really?
From my admittedly layman’s understanding of these things, the President serves as the instrument of Congress. Congress has the power to declare war (or, as was the case with Iraq, the power to abrogate that power, apparently) and the President, as the Commander-in-Chief or, if you will the Decisionator, then wages the war on Congress’s behalf.
What I’m a little unclear on is: Does Congress has the power to *un*declare war?
The Decisionator is determined to send in more troops, and Congress seems determined to voice its objections via a nonbinding resolution, which is kind of like parents setting a curfew and then enforcing it by announcing that they’re going to snore really loudly in protest when the kid breaks it. What I want to know is whether Congress has the power to say, “We’re done. We were told the United States was going to war for these reasons. These reasons no longer exist. The war is over. We’re pulling out,” and then inform the President that he no longer has Congressional authority to wage war, and that if he continues to do so, he will be impeached. In which case, does the Decisionator obey their will or does he tell them to go screw themselves, in which case we have a full blown constitutional crisis.
I’m no con law scholar. I honestly don’t have any idea. But it would be interesting in that it would be the second time in the last seven years that matters relating to George Bush suddenly send everyone scrambling to the constitution to see what should happen next.
PAD
Recent Comments