David Skaggs: “Mr. Chairman, it is sad that an issue of this importance and significance, both constitutionally and for national…”

“Mr. Chairman, it is sad that an issue of this importance and significance, both constitutionally and for national security policy, should be manipulated, really for election year purposes, here in the closing weeks of this session of Congress. This bill is ill advised for both constitutional law and practical reasons, and even more fundamentally, for constitutional policy and reciprocity reasons. The first point: It undermines absolutely essential responsibilities and authorities that have to be retained in the person of the Commander in Chief, the President of the United States. The impracticality of trying to comply with the waiver provision, which I am sure is held up as some saving aspect of this, but is really a sham, is astounding. It requires a President to predict the unpredictable, to foresee the unforeseeable, to promise the unpromisable. It does not work. Second, constitutional policy: I agree with my colleague from Ohio, Mr. Traficant, this body ought to be standing up for its responsibilities under the war powers clause.”