Follow us on social

Meijer-mcgovern

McGovern, Meijer tee up House bill clawing back war powers from president

Now we have a bicameral, bipartisan fight on our hands over who has authority to determine how US military powers are used.

Analysis | North America

The bipartisan effort to strengthen and restore Congressional war powers becomes bicameral today, as Representatives Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) and Peter Meijer (R-Mich.) introduce the National Security Reforms and Accountability Act. 

This is the House counterpart to the bipartisan National Security Powers Act introduced last month by Senators Chris Murphy, Bernie Sanders, and Mike Lee. Like the Senate bill, the House  NSRAAwould require Congress to live up to its Constitutional responsibility to determine and control how the nation’s military powers are used.

“For decades, presidents of both parties have slowly but surely usurped Congressional authority on matters of national security. It’s happened regardless of who occupies the Oval Office or which party is in charge on Capitol Hill,” said McGovern, in a statement announcing the bill today. “We need to come together in a bipartisan way to reclaim our rightful role as a co-equal branch of government before it’s too late, and that is what the National Security Reforms and Accountability Act aims to do.”

​The introduction of these bills is the latest chapter in a long battle to reverse the transfer of war powers to the executive. After the debacle of Vietnam, the 1975 War Powers Resolution attempted to restore the Constitutional requirement that Congress approve the use of military force. But aggressive executive branch efforts to assert control of the military, especially after the War on Terror began in 2001, combined with reluctance by Congress to rein in the executive, has led to the current necessity to re-assert Congressional powers.

"The National Security Reforms and Accountability Act will put Congress back in the driver’s seat so we can deliver on our duty to the American people as it is laid out by the Constitution, " Meijer added in his own statement.

The executive branch is still drawing on decades-old authorizations of military force, such as the Congressional authorizations for war in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001 and 2002, to justify the use of the military in circumstances far removed from those that led to the original authorization. Today, only a small minority of Americans could even name the countries where the U.S. is exerting military force on the ground. Beyond the direct use of military force, the executive is also making unilateral decisions on a wide variety of quasi-military uses of force, including arms sales and other forms of support to foreign militaries engaged in hostilities, and the enforcement of broad-based economic sanctions on entire populations, something that has traditionally been viewed as an act of war.

The NSRAA requires rapid Congressional approval of a wide range of executive branch actions that involve military or quasi-military force. Unlike the existing War Powers legislation, it adds teeth to this requirement by automatically cutting off funding if approval is not forthcoming. The automatic funding cutoff in the absence of a positive vote of Congressional approval is an even more significant change because it definitively removes the ability of the executive branch to veto Congressional disapproval of the use of force. 

The legislation also automatically sunsets Congressional authorizations for the use of force after a two-year period, which would end the current practice of claiming that long outdated Congressional authorizations justify current military engagements.

The NSRAA also explicitly expands requirements for Congressional approval to the areas of arms sales and declarations of emergency that justify unilateral executive actions. Crucially, these reforms extend to the executive branch imposition of economic sanctions which are authorized under emergency powers.  Broad-based economic sanctions have a terrible human cost but receive far too little oversight or attention from Congress and the public.

Some recent votes indicate that Congress may be growing more assertive in its use of war powers. These include the majority vote to cut off U.S. support for Saudi Arabia for its war in Yemen, and a vote of 141 House members, including a majority of Democratic House members, to end the long-time U.S. military presence in Syria if explicit Congressional approval was not forthcoming within a year. The NSRAA and the National Security Powers Act are much more extensive and comprehensive reforms and passage will be a long-term and challenging effort. 

But as the public’s impatience  over extensive, murky, and unaccountable military engagements abroad grows, lawmakers could be emboldened to finally put these critical efforts over the finish line. Let’s hope so.


Rep. Peter Meijer (Mich.)(Creative Commons/Tom Caprara) and Rep. James McGovern (D-Mass.)(USDA photo by Bob Nichols)
Analysis | North America
Diplomacy Watch Donald Trump Putin Zelensky
Top Photo Credit: Diplomacy Watch (Khody Akhavi)

Macron fails to get Europe to send troops to Ukraine

QiOSK

European leaders met this week at the behest of French President Emmanuel Macron, who wants to solidify a plan to send troops to Ukraine as a security package. However, the meetings emerged, according to the Wall Street Journal, “without a public commitment from other European countries to send troops.”

France and the United Kingdom have been pushing for troops on the ground in Ukraine, and other countries, like Sweden, Denmark, and Australia, have indicated a willingness to do so as well. The main hurdle appears to be that most are apparently unwilling to send their armed forces to Ukraine without the protection of the United States.

keep readingShow less
Donald Trump
Top image credit: Andrew Harnik / Shutterstock.com

The war over war with Iran has just begun

Middle East

The war drums are getting louder in Washington.

In recent weeks, many of the same neoconservative voices who pushed the U.S. into Iraq are calling for strikes on Iran. Groups like the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy are once again promoting confrontation, claiming there may never be a better time to act. But this is a dangerous illusion that risks derailing what Donald Trump himself says he wants: a deal, not another disastrous war in the Middle East.

keep readingShow less
Golden Dome Iron Dome
Top Image Credit: Israel's Iron Dome anti-missile system intercepts rockets after Iran fired a salvo of ballistic missiles, as seen from Ashkelon, Israel, October 1, 2024 REUTERS/Amir Cohen TPX

Saying the quiet part out loud: All that glitters is not 'Golden Dome'

Military Industrial Complex

As the Trump administration proceeds full speed ahead on its Golden Dome missile defense project, U.S. officials and engineering experts alike suggest it's a next to impossible undertaking.

Gen. Michael Guetlein, Space Force vice chief, likened Golden Dome to the WWII-era Manhattan project, which created the atom bomb. Acting DoD official Steven J. Morani called it a “monster systems engineering problem.” Trump himself compared it to President Ronald Reagan’s 1983 Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), or “Star Wars,” a space-based defense system that never made it past the drawing board.

keep readingShow less

Trump transition

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.