The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and the use-of-force authorization requested to confront the terrorist group dominated the Sunday talk shows this weekend.
Former Obama administration Secretary of Defense and CIA Director Leon Panetta told CNN’s “State of the Union” that the Islamic State represents “truly a new phase on the war on terrorism.”
The Islamic State has the financial means and arms to conduct “the kind of offensive operations that have to be met tooth and nail with everything we’ve got,” Panetta said.
Earlier this week, President Obama provided Congress a new authorization for the use of military force, and each of the major network’s Sunday shows had guests discuss what to expect next in Congress on the legislation.
On CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said that the legislation would need to be amended in a way that it “can in fact pass muster” in both the House and Senate, but that he thought Congress had a responsibility to provide an authorization.
On ABC’s “This Week,” Rep. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat and the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said that Congress must pass an authorization but work to ensure the bill is not “ another blank check.”
If Congress does not act on the authorization, Schiff said, it would send a statement “that [Congress is] no longer relevant in that debate. We should never have taken six months to take this up, but it’s finally happening.”
On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” both Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and ranking member Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., discussed the president’s proposed use-of-force authorization.
McCain criticized Obama for not including a strategy with his AUMF request, but said Congress should give the president the authorities he has requested. While a debate on the AUMF is appropriate, having members use the request as a way to rein in the president’s war powers “eventually leads to 535 commanders-in-chief,” McCain said.
Reed said that he did not agree with the three-year limit established in the AUMF proposal, noting that it would not be advantageous to send a signal about the timeframe for U.S. engagement.
