Repealing the Iraq War authorization?

[lpetrich]

House repeals 2002 Iraq War authorization - POLITICO

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer says he will also put the authorization to a vote this year and President Joe Biden supports its repeal.

The House voted to repeal the 2002 authorization for the use of military force in Iraq on Thursday, a rare and historic effort by lawmakers to rein in presidential war powers.

Thursday’s vote brings the U.S. one step closer to ending the so-called Forever Wars in the Middle East that have defined the post-9/11 presidential administrations. And while the Iraq War ended nearly a decade ago, lawmakers saw an opportunity — with Democratic control of Congress — to reassert their Article I authority to declare and authorize foreign wars and military operations.

The 268-161 vote was bipartisan, drawing support from 49 Republicans and all but one Democrat. It was also a victory for Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who has pushed for the repeal for several years while presidents from both parties have undermined Congress’ role.

I checked on clerk.house.gov to find out what the votes were.

Motion to Recommit - "The motion to recommit provides one final opportunity for the House to debate and amend a measure..." - THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT
D N 217 nv 2
R Y 204 N 2 nv 5
Total Y 204 N 219 nv 7

Then,
The final vote
D Y 219, N 1
R Y 49, N 160, nv 2
Total Y 268, N 161, nv 2

Republicans who voted for it included such right-wingers as Andy Biggs R-AZ, Lauren Boebert R-CO, Mo Brooks R-AL, Madison Cawthorn R-NC, Matt Gaetz R-FL, Louie Gohmert R-AZ, Paul Gosar R-AZ, MTG R-GA, Darrell Issa R-CA, Jim Jordan R-OH, Chip Roy R-TX.

The only Democrat who voted against it was Elaine Luria D-SC-02.

 

[lpetrich]

The bill:
H.R.256 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): To repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

Sponsor:
Rep. Lee, Barbara [D-CA-13] (Introduced 01/11/2021)

Someone who has long opposed that AUMF.

Cosponsors: 134, original 39, including 9 Republicans, including Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz, and Chip Roy.

There is a related bill in the Senate,

S.J.Res.10 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): A joint resolution to repeal the authorizations for use of military force against Iraq, and for other purposes. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

Sponsor: Sen. Kaine, Tim [D-VA] (Introduced 03/03/2021)

Cosponsors: 20, original 7, including 5 Republicans, including Rand Paul R-TN and Lisa Murkowski R-AK.

Back to Politico.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Thursday he did not support repealing the 2002 authorization, calling it "reckless" without broader debate. The bill would need the support of at least 10 Republican senators to pass the upper chamber.

"Reality is more complicated, more dangerous and less politically convenient than its supporters believe," McConnell said.

...
Despite the bipartisan showing in Thursday’s vote, the bulk of House Republicans still opposed taking the 2002 authorization off the books. Some top GOP lawmakers argued Democrats were rushing the repeal process without fully consulting with national security officials and U.S. allies, and contended the measure should be replaced with a revamped authorization that allows the U.S. to go after Iranian proxies and other groups that have gained a foothold in the region.

Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas, the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, called the Iraq authorization “outdated” but said Congress needs to craft “clear, updated authorities” to replace it.

...
Biden has pledged to work with lawmakers to replace the 2001 authorization with one that is better aligned with the threats facing the U.S. in the region. Those talks are in the early stages, and lawmakers expect it will be a more gargantuan task than simply repealing the 2002 measure, which is rarely invoked anymore.

 

[untermensche]

The House voted to repeal the 2002 authorization for the use of military force in Iraq on Thursday, a rare and historic effort by lawmakers to rein in presidential war powers.

When it is too late.

The Congress abducted it's Constitutional power to declare war and gave Bush a blank check and authorization to attack for any reason he saw fit.

Bush said his god told him to do it.

 

[funinspace]

It will be a nice gesture if the Senate can also pass this, but I don't think I'll hold my breath with Moscow Mitch opposed to giving it up.

 

[RVonse]

The fact that they are even willing to talk about such a bill is a direct consequence of the Trump presidency. We are seeing the white elephant in the room... where the casual observer can notice how "forever wars" only provide benefit for the McConnell elites at the expense of the populous MAGA supporters. These same wars Trump promised would stop.

Trump is no longer in office yet his legacy lives on.

And even more important than that, it proves congress is still scared of the Trump supporters.

 

[Harry Bosch]

The fact that they are even willing to talk about such a bill is a direct consequence of the Trump presidency. We are seeing the white elephant in the room... where the casual observer can notice how "forever wars" only provide benefit for the McConnell elites at the expense of the populous MAGA supporters. These same wars Trump promised would stop.

Trump is no longer in office yet his legacy lives on.

And even more important than that, it proves congress is still scared of the Trump supporters.

Trump's legacy is one where he and his supporters tried to nullify our election and our democracy. He's a traitor as far as I'm concerned. And I don't give him a lot credit for the Afghan pullout. He continued the policy of the eventual withdraw. Biden's actions have not been a surprise. Having said that, I do feel terrible for the Afghan civilians and the girls. But we've been there for a long time. It's time to go...

 

[RVonse]

The fact that they are even willing to talk about such a bill is a direct consequence of the Trump presidency. We are seeing the white elephant in the room... where the casual observer can notice how "forever wars" only provide benefit for the McConnell elites at the expense of the populous MAGA supporters. These same wars Trump promised would stop.

Trump is no longer in office yet his legacy lives on.

And even more important than that, it proves congress is still scared of the Trump supporters.

Trump's legacy is one where he and his supporters tried to nullify our election and our democracy. He's a traitor as far as I'm concerned. And I don't give him a lot credit for the Afghan pullout. He continued the policy of the eventual withdraw. Biden's actions have not been a surprise. Having said that, I do feel terrible for the Afghan civilians and the girls. But we've been there for a long time. It's time to go...

You are more than entitled to bitch about other aspects of the Trump presidency and you could even be right. But it is becoming very clear we are now much better off with him having served. My post remains valid. It is much the same in business where it takes failure in order to make progress.

And without Trump...without all the gnashing of teeth at the capital... it would be business as usual in congress.

At present (probably for the first time in my 60+ year lifetime) we view a congress at least present themselves as though they serve the people before themselves. Refreshing to say the least.

 

[Harry Bosch]

The fact that they are even willing to talk about such a bill is a direct consequence of the Trump presidency. We are seeing the white elephant in the room... where the casual observer can notice how "forever wars" only provide benefit for the McConnell elites at the expense of the populous MAGA supporters. These same wars Trump promised would stop.

Trump is no longer in office yet his legacy lives on.

And even more important than that, it proves congress is still scared of the Trump supporters.

Trump's legacy is one where he and his supporters tried to nullify our election and our democracy. He's a traitor as far as I'm concerned. And I don't give him a lot credit for the Afghan pullout. He continued the policy of the eventual withdraw. Biden's actions have not been a surprise. Having said that, I do feel terrible for the Afghan civilians and the girls. But we've been there for a long time. It's time to go...

You are more than entitled to bitch about other aspects of the Trump presidency and you could even be right. But it is becoming very clear we are now much better off with him having served. My post remains valid. It is much the same in business where it takes failure in order to make progress.

Without Trump it would be business as usual.

At present (probably for the first time in my 60+ lifetime) we view a congress at least present themselves as though they serve the people before themselves. Refreshing to say the least.

I can't think of anything that Trump did that improved the country. Not one thing. I'm willing to put the traitor part to the side and debate the issue with you. But I think that he'll go down as one of if not the worst president in our history. But I'm willing to hear your side. We had already starting backing down in Afganistan before Trump was elected. And Trump didn't pull out during his four years. He drew it down and weakened our alliances. But I'm willing to hear your side.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The fact that they are even willing to talk about such a bill is a direct consequence of the Trump presidency. We are seeing the white elephant in the room... where the casual observer can notice how "forever wars" only provide benefit for the McConnell elites at the expense of the populous MAGA supporters. These same wars Trump promised would stop.

Umm... we still had troops in Afghanistan when he left office.

Trump is no longer in office yet his legacy lives on.

Our legacy in Afghanistan will be quite damning.

And even more important than that, it proves congress is still scared of the Trump supporters.

Most of the Republicans voted for the motion to recommit, in a Kerry-esque was against it after I was for it. .

 

[Patooka]

You are more than entitled to bitch about other aspects of the Trump presidency and you could even be right. But it is becoming very clear we are now much better off with him having served.

Because of Trump, no traditional ally trusts the US anymore. That isn't hyperbole, the policy of DFAT is to no longer expect America to honour any agreements that go beyond an election cycle. And I seriously doubt Australia is alone in that determination. The US will never again spearhead a coalition; it's reputation is irrevocably damaged. That is Trump's true legacy.

It is much the same in business where it takes failure in order to make progress.

Trump is living walking proof that philosophy is complete bullshit.

At present (probably for the first time in my 60+ year lifetime) we view a congress at least present themselves as though they serve the people before themselves. Refreshing to say the least.

All that proves is that you haven't been paying attention in the last 60+ years. And I'm not even sure the likes of Gaetz, Taylor Greene or Brooks could even spell the word "people" much less understand their obligation to such a group.

 

[Politesse]

I was really surprised by the bipartisan character of this vote, and grateful! The willingness of the houses of Congress to abdicate their power and role in favor of letting the President direct any and all military affairs is a terrifying thing to me, and I hope this really is a signal that they plan to grow a backbone about this issue in the future.

 

[Patooka]

I was really surprised by the bipartisan character of this vote, and grateful!

Was it though? It's more likely that Republicans voting for this think they can flip it back on the next time one of their own become President. If that is their reasoning, it's about as cynically partisan a move one can make.

 

[Politesse]

I was really surprised by the bipartisan character of this vote, and grateful!

Was it though? It's more likely that Republicans voting for this think they can flip it back on the next time one of their own become President. If that is their reasoning, it's about as cynically partisan a move one can make.

That's still a good thing by my book. I'd rather the Congress restore the tripartite balance of governmental power for petty reasons than continue the path to discord and destruction for the same petty reasons. The power of Congress to declare or prevent war has been steadily eroded for the past three centuries, and in that like this is an extraordinary repudiation of the doctrine of autocracy even if it has been done for hypocritical or inconsistent reasons.

 

[Patooka]

I was really surprised by the bipartisan character of this vote, and grateful!

Was it though? It's more likely that Republicans voting for this think they can flip it back on the next time one of their own become President. If that is their reasoning, it's about as cynically partisan a move one can make.

That's still a good thing by my book. I'd rather the Congress restore the tripartite balance of governmental power for petty reasons than continue the path to discord and destruction for the same petty reasons. The power of Congress to declare or prevent war has been steadily eroded for the past three centuries, and in that like this is an extraordinary repudiation of the doctrine of autocracy even if it has been done for hypocritical or inconsistent reasons.

Then the rules need some serious revising. Particularly in regards to phrases like, "Police Action" and "Peacekeeping Force". "Benevolent Assimilation" might need some work done to it as well.