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.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I think he raises a very valid point from a constitutional perspective. I've been following what he has been saying recently and I admire his honesty. That is so lacking these days when it comes to politics, especially presidential politics.
Thank you for the link.
:-)
One of the reasons I'm such a fan of his is because he looks first to the Constitution before voting.
I'm not sure I agree with every position he's taken, but I find his positions and arguments very compelling.
And even if you don't agree with him, you have no doubt where he will stand on an issue because of his devotion to looking first to the Constitution.
Let's ask our congressfolk to seriously consider this.
I am voting for Ron Paul. He doesn't put up with the political BS and he tells the truth.
Kurt - does this mean you're going to register as a Republican to vote in the primary????
Knew we'd convert you! LOL
:)
One thing you must credit Ron Paul for, thinking clearly.
Why, he's sorta a Ready..., Aim..., Fire kinda guy; how refreshing!
Did he ever introduce the legislation? I cannot find anything on it other than him saying he was going to.
Inga - H.R.2605:
H.R.2605
Title: To establish a sunset for the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243).
Sponsor: Rep Paul, Ron [TX-14] (introduced 6/7/2007) Cosponsors (23)
Latest Major Action: 6/7/2007 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
For more information on it:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:36:./temp/~bdWf0K::
Thank you Maggie. I appreciate your prompt response! I keep an up-to-date candidate comparison page on our "Military Spouses for Change" website and I could not locate this and wanted to be able to reference it.
Have a great day!
Post a Comment