"Obama and the Congressional Cop Out" (with audio)

mcjoan:

Kossacks dpg and BTD note an interview yesterday with Ed Schultz (audio) with Senator Obama. While Obama and Schultz cover a lot of ground, it's the Iraq portion of the interview that is of particular interest.

Unfortunately, Obama punted on Iraq by playing a card that I've seen floated more and more frequently lately, the "we're being held hostage by a madman card." The problem, this talking point goes, is that even if Congress does act to get our troops out, Bush will probably just keep them there anyway.

Here's Obama's formulation of that ultimately defeatest point:

I have concerns about cutting off funding . . . Jim Webb has some concerns, both of us have been consistent critics of the war. I think there is a possibility, given how obstinate the Administration is, that if we try to cut off funding, Bush is hellbent on doing what he is doing . . . he may decide to play chicken and say "you guys do whatever you want [I'm keeping the troops there]" . . . .

So anything Congress might do will just be ignored by Bush anyway, so why bother to act? That's quite the governing philosophy for a Senator to live by. The basic truth is that Congress does indeed have the power to defund this war, a power recognized by both Bush and Cheney:

WSJ: There's a lot of discussion in Congress about putting caps on troop levels or defunding or saying you can't deploy, as commander in chief, troops in Baghdad. Do you think Congress has the constitutional authority . . .

GWB: I think they have the authority to defund, use their funding power . . .

WSJ: You do?

GWB: Oh yeah, they can say 'We won't fund.' That is a constitutional authority of Congress....

WSJ: Can they put caps on total deployments in Iraq?

GWB: They can . . . through the purse. In others, I don't know if they're going to. And I don't want to predict. But they have the right to try to use the power of the purse to determine policy.

"Congress, obviously, has to support the effort through the power of the purse, so they have got a role to play and we certainly recognize that," Cheney said. "But also, you cannot run a war by committee.... You cannot simply stick your finger up in the wind and say, 'Gee, public opinion's against, we better quit' " Cheney agreed. That would "validate the al-Qaeda view of the world," he added.

There is definitely an "I dare you to" posture behind those messages. But Congress, last time I read the Constitution, is in a position to take up that dare. Meaning that in this game of chicken, Congress is in the same position of power as the president. That's what holding the purse strings is all about.

And that's what being a coequal branch of government really boils down to. As the branch of government that speaks for the people, those people with the title of "Representative" are precisely the ones who should have their fingers in the wind. When they test those winds, they will find that the American people want a way out of Iraq. They will also find that more of the public supports defunding the war than those who oppose it. It's a slim majority in this poll (by Fox!), 45% to 44%, but its a number that is likely to keep increasing as this war continues to drag on.

There are few good options at this point for Iraq. The damage this administration has done to that country, to Afghanistan, to the entire region is incalculable. As is the damage done domestically. Can there be any other answer, domestically, than to bring an end it? That's not going to happen with a Congress that persists in the belief that it is not as powerful as the President.

Cross-posted at www.seattleforbarackobama.com.