“The auto rescue succeeded in no small part because we did not have to deal with Congress,” writes Steve Rattner, President Obama’s former car czar. Had Congress exercised its constitutional duty of authorizing and overseeing the bailout, Rattner adds, “we would have been subject to endless congressional posturing, deliberating, bickering, and micromanagement. …” This excerpt from Rattner’s book “Overhaul” expresses what appears to be the Obama administration’s deep impatience with the carefully designed deliberative processes of our constitutional republic. Concerning Congress and the U.S. role in Libya, however, Obama’s attitude seems to be passing from impatience to contempt. It is all the more upsetting because, as our own Timothy P. Carney notes in these pages today, Obama ran against precisely the sort of imperial presidency he is now running. When he began his “kinetic military action” in Libya, without any serious debate or consultation with our country’s elected representatives, Obama justified himself by invoking the War Powers Resolution of 1973. Under its loosest possible interpretation, that law gives a wartime president a 60-day grace period before he must seek congressional authorization to continue. Those 60 days ended Friday, as several members of Congress reminded Obama in a letter last week. His response to that letter, which Obama’s communications staff deliberately buried in the Friday afternoon news dump, demonstrated that he wants to have it both ways. He was happy to take advantage of the purported 60-day grace period — which may itself be too permissive to meet constitutional muster — but he is not so keen on obeying the same law’s requirement to obtain authorization from Congress for further involvement.
Obama argued in his letter that the Libyan action, in which the United States continues to participate in bombing raids, is sufficiently nonkinetic as to obviate the need for congressional approval. Under Obama’s theory, presidents can start and wage low-intensity conflicts indefinitely without any approval from Congress, despite the Constitution’s clear position that only Congress can commit this nation to war. We are not alone in recognizing this inconsistency. Last week, liberal Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., complained that Obama is “shredding the Constitution” with his refusal to submit to congressional authority. He told CNN: “When a president defiantly violates the law, that really undercuts our effort to urge other countries to have the rule of law.” It is a sad statement that Turkey, whose parliament authorized its involvement in Libya, is in that respect a shining example of democracy in comparison with the U.S.
It is Congress’ prerogative to debate the merits of the Libyan intervention. And were Obama to seek Congress’ approval, he might even receive it. But his refusal to ask evinces a dangerous and arrogant lawlessness. Perhaps Obama thinks he is Rambo after the successful American mission that killed Osama bin Laden. Perhaps he thinks he is still in Chicago, where elected officials routinely flout the law without consequence. Whatever his delusion, it is time for Obama to snap out of it and obey the law.
