A Spork in the Drawer

The Powerful And Clueless

Former Secs. of State Warren Christopher and Bush Family Conigliere James Baker have an idea:

The report calls for the passage of a new War Powers Consultation Act early in the next Congress. It would require the president to consult with a new joint congressional committee before deploying troops to a "significant armed conflict" -- defined as lasting longer than one week -- and would mandate regular consultation thereafter. Response to a terrorist attack and covert actions would be exempted from its requirements.

The bill would also require a congressional vote approving military action within 30 days of its inception. If approval was not given, any lawmaker could introduce a "disapproval" resolution that would have to be voted on within five days. If it passed, the president would have to comply or veto the measure. If lawmakers could not override a presidential veto, Congress's remaining option would be to deny funding.

Baker notes that the Constitution gives Congress alone the power to declare war.

That sounds like a viable "War Powers Act" to me.

Astoundingly, out of the hundreds of wars and significant military actions this nation has undertaken Congress has declared war only five times: 1812, Mexican, Spanish, WWI, and WWII.

Since presidents of all parties have ignored the Constitution in this matter - and Congress has refused to do anything about it - why would yet another War Powers Act change anything at all?

.

Mendacious Bastard

Stephen Hadley takes to the op-ed page of the WaPo to explain George's new strategery for Iraq. Throughout he cites the Iraq Study Group (aka, "Baker-Hamilton") in support of the new policy.

That's rather amusing.

Let's jump into the Wayback Machine and see what BushCo&trade has said previously:

Asked if Baker would help implement the report, a spokesman for Mr. Bush said, "Jim Baker can go back to his day job."

They'll say anything to convince people of their righteousness.

.

That Settles That

Via Froomkin, CBS's Bill Plante reports:

Asked if Baker would help implement the report, a spokesman for Mr. Bush said, "Jim Baker can go back to his day job."

And this is why I've had no comment on the ISG ("Baker-Hamiltom") Report. As Atrios points out, the Administration will pick and choose, for cosmetic (read: PR) reasons, a few things from the report and in the end nothing will really change.

It's all window dressing.

.