Feingold: Congress has plenty of history stopping U.S. involvement in war!

[RiverStone]

excerpt from:

Opening Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold
Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing
Exercising Congress’s Constitutional Power to End a War
January 30, 2007

<snip>

"There is plenty of precedent for Congress exercising its constitutional authority to stop U.S. involvement in armed conflict.

In late December 1970, Congress prohibited the use of funds to finance the introduction of United States ground combat troops into Cambodia or to provide U.S. advisors to or for Cambodian military forces in Cambodia.

In late June 1973, Congress set a date to cut off funds for combat activities in South East Asia. The provision read, and I quote:

“None of the funds herein appropriated under this act may be expended to support directly or indirectly combat activities in or over Cambodia, Laos, North Vietnam, and South Vietnam by United States forces, and after August 15, 1973, no other funds heretofore appropriated under any other act may be expended for such purpose.”

More recently, President Clinton signed into law language that prohibited funding after March 31, 1994, for military operations in Somalia, with certain limited exceptions. And in 1998, Congress passed legislation including a provision that prohibited funding for Bosnia after June 30, 1998, unless the President made certain assurances.

Our witnesses today are well aware of this history, and I look forward to hearing their analysis of it as they discuss Congress’s power in this area. They are legal scholars, not military or foreign policy experts. We are here to find out from them not what Congress should do, but what Congress can do. Ultimately, it rests with Congress to decide whether to use its constitutional powers to end the war.

The answer should be clear. Since the President is adamant about pursuing his failed policies in Iraq, Congress has the duty to stand up and use its power to stop him. If Congress doesn’t stop this war, it’s not because it doesn’t have the power. It’s because it doesn’t have the will."

full text of statement here:

http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/statements/07/01/20070130.htm


* * * * * * * * *

:applause:

This just totally rocks! Thank you Russ for articulating the words of so many of us who are passionate about ending not only this tragic war in Iraq, but reining in the reckless actions of a President who refuses to listen to reason and the will of the people. My expectation is 100% support from your colleagues in the Democratic party. We will be closely watching and anticipating what happens next.


:kick: :patriot:









RiverStone

[Cascadian]

1. Thank you, Senator Feingold!

I wished more Democratic Senators would follow your lead.


John

[RiverStone]

2. It seems to me...

That we should demand it of our DEM Senators! If they do not vote for this, then who the heck are they listening too?! :shrug:

Thanks for sharing John :)




peace~

[elocs]

3. At the California Commonwealth club former Sec. of Defense William Perry said

that Congress should immediately pass a binding resolution which states that Bush may not use Iraq funds to attack any other nation (meaning Iran). He also had a great line about Bush's Iraq policy: "Often in error, seldom in doubt".

[thunder35]

4. maybe it's time they cut the funding?

[RiverStone]

5. What ever they do...

Symbolic votes are totally meaningless to Shrub's regime. No more non-binding b.s.

It HAS TO BE real and felt - otherwise, they don't give a damn.

[unblock]

6. what, no mention of the boland amendment?

iran-contra 101

[usregimechange]

7. kick