President Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy agreed on Sunday to meet on Monday afternoon to try to jump-start talks aimed at averting a government shutdown. As the deadline to pass a federal budget approaches, the role of Congress in determining military engagements is once again being called into question. The War Powers Act of 1973, also known as the War Powers Resolution, is a law that was passed by Congress in response to the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal.
Before the War Powers Act, the president had broad constitutional powers to commit American troops to military engagements without congressional approval. However, the Vietnam War had dragged on for years without a clear end in sight, leading to public protests and calls for Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over the use of military force. In addition, the Watergate scandal had eroded public trust in the executive branch, leading to concerns about the potential abuse of presidential power.
The War Powers Act was designed to address these concerns by establishing a framework for the president to consult with Congress before committing American troops to military engagements. The law requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying troops and to seek congressional approval for military engagements lasting longer than 60 days. If Congress does not approve the use of force, the president must withdraw troops within 30 days.
Despite its passage, the War Powers Act has been the subject of controversy and debate. Some critics argue that the law is unconstitutional, as it infringes on the president's powers as commander-in-chief. Others argue that the law does not go far enough in limiting presidential authority, as it still allows the president to commit American troops without congressional approval for short periods of time.
In practice, the War Powers Act has been invoked by presidents from both parties to justify military engagements, but also to seek congressional authorization for military action. For example, President George H.W. Bush sought congressional approval for the Gulf War in 1991, while President Barack Obama sought congressional approval for military action in Syria in 2013.
The War Powers Act has also been the subject of legal challenges. In 1983, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of INS v. Chadha that the law was unconstitutional, as it violated the doctrine of separation of powers by giving Congress veto power over presidential actions. However, Congress was able to override the veto and the law remains in effect today.
In recent years, there has been renewed interest in the War Powers Act due to ongoing military engagements in the Middle East and concerns about presidential overreach. Some members of Congress have introduced legislation to strengthen the law, while others have called for its repeal.
Ultimately, the War Powers Act represents an important check on presidential authority and a recognition of the role of Congress in determining military engagements. As the debate over the federal budget and military spending continues, it is important to remember the history and significance of this landmark law.
The U.S. government will likely run out of money “in the first two weeks of June.” That's when the Congressional Budget Office expects the debt ceiling to be reached, sparking fears of a potential government shutdown. If President Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) do reach an agreement, leaders in both chambers of Congress will have to try to come up with a compromise that takes into account the need for national security, while also respecting the constitutional powers of the executive and legislative branches.
In conclusion, the War Powers Act of 1973 represents an important milestone in the history of American democracy. It reflects the need for checks and balances in the exercise of presidential authority, while also recognizing the importance of national security. As Congress and the White House continue to navigate the challenges of governing, the War Powers Act provides a framework for ensuring that decisions about military engagements are made in a transparent and accountable manner.
