MOD 6: Congress and Partisanship in US Foreign Policy
The Constitution, Congressional Authority, and U.S. Foreign Policy
Congressional authority over foreign policy is deeply rooted in two main articles of the U.S. Constitution:
Article I, Section 8: Grants Congress the power to:
"Declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water."
"Raise and support Armies…To provide and maintain a Navy."
"Make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces."
"Provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions."
"Provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States."
"Power of the Purse": Although not explicitly quoted in the transcript, Congress's control over appropriations is a fundamental tool for influencing foreign policy actions, stemming from Article I, Section 8's power to raise and support armies and provide for the navy.
Article II, Section 2: Grants the Senate a crucial role in treaties:
The President "shall have the power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur."
The War Powers Resolution (1973)
Purpose: This Act was a direct Congressional attempt to curb the President's war-making powers, particularly following the Vietnam War.
Veto Override: It was passed by Congress over President Nixon's veto.
Presidential View: Every President since Nixon has viewed the War Powers Resolution as unconstitutional, arguing that it violates the separation of powers established by the Constitution.
Core Provisions:
Section 2 (a) - Purpose and Policy: Aims to ensure the "collective judgement of both the Congress and the President" applies to introducing U.S. Armed Forces into hostilities or situations where imminent involvement is indicated.
Section 2 (b) - Constitutional Basis: Reaffirms Congress's power under Article I, Section 8, to make "all laws necessary and proper" for executing powers vested in the U.S. government.
Section 2 (c) - Presidential Powers: States that the President's constitutional powers as Commander-in-Chief to introduce U.S. Armed Forces into hostilities are exercised only pursuant to:
A declaration of war.
Specific statutory authorization.
A national emergency created by an attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
Section 3 - Consultation: Mandates that the President "in every possible instance shall consult with Congress" before introducing U.S. Armed Forces into hostilities or situations of imminent hostilities.
Section 5 (b) - Congressional Action: Requires the President to terminate any use of U.S. Armed Forces within sixty calendar days, unless Congress has:
Declared war or enacted specific authorization for such use.
Extended the sixty-day period by law.
Is physically unable to meet due to an armed attack upon the United States.
Impact of Domestic Political Structure on U.S. Foreign Policy
Role of Institutions: Domestic political structures, particularly institutions, play a significant role in shaping U.S. foreign policy.
Institutions Defined: These are the rules that govern how two individuals or groups with conflicting interests arrive at a collective choice.
Example: Bargaining over congressional authority to wage war against ISIS exemplifies the interplay of operative institutions such as:
The War Powers Act.
The Constitution.
Elections.
Practical Politics: Partisanship and Divided Government
Partisan Composition: The partisan makeup of both Congress and the Executive Branch is a critical factor in foreign policy.
Divided Government: Occurs when the President's party does not control both chambers of Congress. This scenario typically leads to greater Congressional oversight of foreign policy, including decisions regarding the use of military force.
Reasons for Increased Oversight: Electoral incentives for the opposing party to scrutinize the White House increase. Additionally, the President is more likely to share information with their own party, prompting the opposition to increase oversight to compensate for this information asymmetry.
Examples: Congressional oversight increased during the Iraq War (approx. 2003-2006) and regarding President Obama's actions in Syria (2013).
Effectiveness: According to Howell and Pevehouse (2005), strong Congressional opposition can serve as an effective constraint on the use of military force; Presidents are less likely to engage in military action as the opposition party gains more seats in Congress.
"Politics does not stop at the water's edge": This adage serves as an important reminder that domestic political considerations significantly influence foreign policy decisions.
Partisanship Defined: Refers to the ideological identification of a politician, usually conceptualized along a left (Democratic) to right (Republican) continuum.
Conventional Wisdom: Traditionally, Republicans were perceived as tougher on foreign policy than Democrats.
Shifting Landscape: The rise of the Tea Party wing within the Republican party has introduced a more isolationist tendency, altering this conventional view.
Congressional Oversight Mechanisms
Congress exercises oversight over foreign policy through various means:
Hearings: Calling more congressional hearings allows for detailed examination of executive actions.
Public Criticism: Engaging in public criticism of presidential foreign policy decisions.
Legislation: Passing legislation that imposes restrictions on presidential actions.
Spending Bills: Setting conditions on spending bills to direct or limit the implementation of policy (utilizing the "power of the purse").
Congress, Public Opinion, and Foreign Policy
Shaping Public Opinion: Congress can influence public opinion regarding foreign policy through:
Public Criticism: Direct criticism of the President, often amplified through media access.
Hearings: Conducting open congressional committee meetings on foreign policy issues, which serve as a constitutional power for oversight.
The type and quantity of hearings are often shaped by the presence or absence of divided government.
Agenda Setting: Public criticism from Congress can also influence how the media covers foreign policy, thereby shaping the public's perception of the President and specific policies.
Weissman's Critique: Congressional Inactivity and Deference
Strong Critique: Weissman offers a strong criticism of Congress's inaction and failure to assert its constitutional authority in decisions regarding the use of military force.
Historical Shift: He argues that there was a significant historical shift after 9/11, leading to increased Congressional deference to the President on matters of military action.
Examples of Failure: Weissman cites Congressional failures in interventions such as Libya and Syria as instances where Congress did not uphold its constitutional responsibilities concerning the use of military force.
McKeon and Tess's Recommendations: Reasserting Congressional Role
Context: This reading was written by Democratic staffers, advocating for House Democrats to reassert Congress's role in foreign policy during a period of divided government.
Key Recommendations for Reasserting Constitutional Responsibilities:
Trade: Congress should reassert its authority over both tariffs and trade deals.
Use of Force: Congress should consider a new Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) to define and limit military engagements.
Public Oversight: Emphasize greater public oversight through congressional hearings.
Legislation: Utilize legislative power, particularly through the budget process, to influence and constrain foreign policy.