Panel Urges New Limit on Executive War Powers

Congress has rolled over for Bush on every issue. Could this development signal the end of Congressional spinelessness -- and the beginning of the restoration of the republic? Let's take a look:

The president should be forced by law to consult Congress before going to war, a bipartisan panel including several prominent former U.S. officials said on Tuesday.

The commission led by former Secretaries of State James Baker, a Republican, and Warren Christopher, a Democrat, aimed to clarify the cloudy division between the White House and the U.S. Congress over the power to conduct war.

But before we start singing "The wicked Neocons are dead," we might want to take a closer look at the proposed law. Looks to me like celebrating the restoration of the Constitution and the rule of law in Imperial America is a tad premature. For example:

The panel proposed a new law -- the "War Powers Consultation Act" -- that would require the president to consult with Congress before deploying U.S. troops into "significant armed conflict," defined as combat operations lasting, or expected to last, more than a week. ...

The proposed law would require Congress to vote on a resolution of approval or disapproval. But it would not require the president to win lawmakers' consent. The president could simply veto a congressional resolution of disapproval and continue combat operations.

In other words, it's toothless. This proposed law -- and it's nothing but a suggestion at this point, not even a bill -- is purely for show for those of you who think we still live in a republic of laws and limited government.

The military-industrial-congressional complex has now fully matured from a worry to a full-blown threat. No wonder 69% of Americans polled believe the Founders wouldn't recognize the country they fought and bled for.