[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 41 (Friday, March 9, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H2379-H2380]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    CONGRESS MUST NOT INTRUDE ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVINCE OF THE 
                    PRESIDENT AS COMMANDER IN CHIEF

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, it has been quite a week here on Capitol 
Hill with the unveiling by the Democratic majority of their new plan 
for a fully funded withdrawal from our presence in Iraq.
  The contrast that took place yesterday also was quite striking. 
General Petraeus, our new commander on the ground in Baghdad, had his 
first meeting this Thursday with the media in Baghdad, describing what 
our military leaders were doing in the midst of that war-torn country. 
And at the same time, on the other side of the world, many would-be 
generals here in Congress were describing their plans for the war in 
Iraq.
  Democratic leaders, according to press releases from the House 
Appropriations Committee, outlined a plan for veterans' funding in the 
so-called war supplemental but also a plan that would set a timeline 
for bringing United States participation in Iraq's war to an end.
  Setting very, very specific dates, the leadership, at least at this 
point, as we know, has outlined a proposal that establishes a timeline 
that would end U.S. participation in Iraq's civil war by July 1, 2007. 
If the President does not certify that the troops have met certain 
specific criteria that has been released to the media, the troops must

[[Page H2380]]

begin at that point an immediate redeployment of their involvement in 
the Iraq War which must be completed by December of 2007. Other dates, 
October 1, also are being discussed and other dates, including March 1, 
2008. It was a startling contrast, to say the least.
  On Thursday of this week, our generals in Baghdad and our 
``generals'' here in Congress were describing their plans for the war 
in Iraq.
  But I must say that history teaches that we have but one commander in 
chief, Madam Speaker. In fact, if you study the minutes of the 
Constitutional Convention in that balmy summer of 1787, you will find 
more agreement on no other point than that our Founders believed in the 
unified chain of command, that there would be one commander in chief 
and that that power, under article II of the Constitution, would be 
vested in the President of the United States.
  We have a role in this Chamber. Under article I, Congress has the 
exclusive authority to declare war and to make decisions which will be 
a part of the aforementioned legislation to determine whether and to 
what degree we will fund war.
  But the conduct of the war on the ground, including the setting of 
benchmarks, the execution of timetables on the ground and the like, 
fall within the purview of the commanders and specifically the 
commander in chief. And I would argue, as something of a student of 
American history, during the Revolutionary period, that our Founders 
rejected this because of painful experiences during the Revolutionary 
War. Our first commander in chief, George Washington, actually would 
spend every night writing letters in his tent to Congress to ask 
permission for military maneuvers and almost failed as a result of that 
micromanagement.
  Congress must not intrude on the constitutional province of the 
President of the United States to lead us as Commander in Chief. 
Napoleon said it best. He said, ``I would rather face 20 brilliant 
generals than one mediocre one.''
  We must, as we move into this debate, carry before the American 
people a very simple principle: We must support our troops in the 
field, provide them with the resources they need to get the job done 
and come home safe. But in the midst of this debate, with civility, let 
us also take the case to the American people of whether or not they 
want one commander in chief or whether they want 435 commanders in 
chief elected to this article I body of the Congress. I say we have one 
leader of our military who leads our commanders on the ground. The 
Constitution says it; I will stand by it.

                          ____________________