[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 137 (Monday, October 5, 1998)]
[House]
[Page H9350]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                CONGRESS MAINTAINS POWER TO DECLARE WAR

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 21, 1997, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Skaggs) is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Speaker, as the country and this body battles to find 
some clarity in the back and forth between the salacious and the 
fallacious, there are actually some significant and important things 
going on in Washington and in Congress.
  One of those has to do with the fact that we may be on the verge of 
launching a NATO attack under United States leadership against the 
country of Yugoslavia because of the awful, awful conduct of the 
security forces of Yugoslavia under the direction of President 
Milosevic in going after innocent civilians in Kosovo.
  One of the important aspects of this unfolding story and policy has 
to do with the question of whether, as the United States undertakes 
this effort, whether we do so in compliance with the requirements of 
our own Constitution.
  Article I Section 8 of the Constitution provides very clearly that it 
is Congress that has the power to make war, whether it is a limited war 
or a more general war. The power to initiate offensive military action 
against another country with which we are at least nominally at peace 
is not a question that resides in the Executive Branch of government 
but here in the Legislative Branch.
  Unfortunately, the history of the post World War II era in the United 
States is a history of the disuse and the disregard of this very 
important responsibility provided for in the Constitution and assigned 
to the Congress. Basically we have had a succession of Presidents who 
have asserted an ever broader definition of their exclusive authority 
to initiate military action.
  We encounter now, in the face of the pending Kosovo matter the 
argument of, ``Well, everyone else has done it, why can President 
Clinton not assert this very broad reach of presidential authority?''
  The Secretary of State in testimony to Congress earlier this year 
basically said that it is the Administration's view that the President 
as commander in chief has the inherent power under the Constitution to 
take military action in defense of United States interests abroad as 
the President sees and defines them.
  In the face of this post World War II history, we have a parallel and 
unfortunate history of congressional acquiescence. There are lots of 
reasons for that. Suffice it to say that, if it is in fact our 
responsibility that is at stake here, it is up to Congress to assert it 
and to protect it.
  The situation in Kosovo presents a pretty stark set of facts to which 
this provision of our Constitution ought to apply. We recognize 
Yugoslavia as a sovereign independent nation. The United States 
recognizes Kosovo as an integral part of Yugoslavia. It does not 
recognize a right to an independent Kosovo. There has been no attack by 
Yugoslav forces against the United States or our allies. And yet, we 
nonetheless propose as U.S. policy with our NATO allies to initiate an 
attack against Yugoslavia.
  Let me say it may very well be that the behavior of Yugoslav security 
forces and President Milosevic is an adequate cause for war. But, 
again, if there were ever a case in which the war power responsibility 
of the Congress is clear and ought to be invoked, it is under these 
facts and circumstances. It is not that Congress has ``a'' role, is 
supposed to be consulted or whatever: we have ``the'' role in making 
this decision.
  Remember the inherent wisdom that the framers of the Constitution had 
in drafting this provision as they did. They realized it would be 
unwise to leave with any single individual, the President of the United 
States, the power to take the country into war. They realized it was 
essential to involve the people's Representatives in Congress in such a 
momentous decision and to have them examine thoroughly the implications 
and consequences of initiating warfare. They realized that it would be 
important for the American people, through their representatives, to be 
involved from the beginning in such an undertaking because it is the 
people's wealth and lives that will be put at stake in any military 
undertaking.
  We have learned since then that our own military leadership 
recognizes the importance of Congress taking this step at the 
beginning, because it means that there will be a full debate and a full 
effort to make sure that there is national support for such a military 
undertaking.
  So this is the right thing for us to do. It is the right way for us 
to do it. It would be wrong for Congress to stand by again and permit 
President Clinton to take the country into war without prior 
authorization.

                          ____________________