Congressman Ron Paul does a weekly column on various topics of interest. I thought this week's column, primarily a response to the criticism of his statements during the South Carolina debate, to be quite interesting.
He lays out his belief that Congress abdicated its responsibility to declare war and that the U.S. should have never gone to war to enforce U.N. resolutions.
He also says:
"This week I plan to introduce legislation that will add a sunset clause to the original authorization (Public Law 107-243) six months after passage. This is designed to give Congress ample time between passage and enactment to craft another authorization or to update the existing one. With the original objectives fulfilled, Congress has a legal obligation to do so. Congress also has a moral obligation to our troops to provide relevant and coherent policy objectives in Iraq .
Unlike other proposals, this bill does not criticize the president’s handling of the war. This bill does not cut off funds for the troops. This bill does not set a timetable for withdrawal. Instead, it recognizes that our military has achieved the objectives as they were spelled out in law and demands that Congress live up to its constitutional obligation to provide oversight. I am hopeful that this legislation will enjoy broad support among those who favor continuing or expanding the war as well as those who favor ending the war. We need to consider anew the authority for Iraq and we need to do it sooner rather than later."
I do not yet know if I support his position - but I cannot fault his emphasis on abiding by the Constitution...if you'd like to read the full article, click here.