Rand Paul failed in his bid for the White House, but he hasn’t given up on limiting how often presidents send soldiers to fight overseas.
To honor the recently deceased boxer, Paul announced his “Muhammad Ali Voluntary Service Act” to abolish Selective Service, and also renewed his efforts to force a Congressional vote on the authorization of the use military force, according to Reason.
Paul’s foreign policy views have little-to-no influence on Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, but his legislative action could hamstring military misadventures such as Libya, Yemen, and drone strikes across Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Somalia.
Americans have become wary of foreign involvement. Fifty-seven percent of Americans think America should “deal with its own problems and let other countries deal with their own problems as best they can,” according to the Pew Research Center. Millennials especially are disillusioned by the prospect of more war across the Middle East and other far-flung regions, even if it’s a “kinetic military action.”
That isn’t reflected by Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, two candidates who share an aggressive vision of foreign policy. For an American public that prefers peace over war and prudence over wars of choice, Paul’s moves in Congress could be a last-ditch effort before the next president makes Obama look like a dove.
“I think the first thing we should do is, that Congress should vote on whether we should be there or not,” Paul told Breitbart. “There should be an authorization from Congress. The second thing though, is we should be aware of the unintended consequences of intervention. I think our intervention in Libya backfired and has made it less safe in Libya, has given ISIS a foothold in Libya.”
American military action across the Middle East relies on an Authorization of Use of Military Force from 2001 and 2003, when American involvement had a drastically different form, Brian Doherty noted for Reason. Paul does not think current action can be Constitutionally justified on that basis.
Congress has avoided approving or limiting the Obama administration’s action against ISIS for years. When other representatives, such as Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), have tried to limit military action, such efforts have been rejected or blocked.
Paul, even when his efforts are quixotic, has crafted an alternative future for Republicans. Not daring to undermine party loyalty, he endorsed Donald Trump, yet his actions in Congress have gone against the grain of a Trump presidency. It’s unclear whether Paul can rebuild support to gain influence against the nativist tendencies of a Trump-led GOP, but for now, his maneuvers hint at what the GOP could be beyond November, win or lose.
