Russ Feingold: “I am pleased to cosponsor S.J. Res 41. As the resolution makes clear, the time is ripe for an open debate on our plans…”

“I am pleased to cosponsor S.J. Res 41. As the resolution makes clear, the time is ripe for an open debate on our plans for Iraq. Some are concerned that an open debate on our policy toward Iraq could expose sensitive intelligence information or that such a debate would tip our hand too much. Others fear that a meaningful debate could back the administration into a corner, and in so doing encourage the administration to adopt a tougher military response. Ultimately, all of these arguments against an open and honest debate on Iraq could be made with respect to nearly any military decision, and if taken to their extreme, these arguments would challenge the balance of powers in the Constitution by excluding Congress from future war-making decisions. Moreover, to answer some of these concerns more directly, I would also note that the almost daily leaks from the administration on our Iraq policy have tipped our hand even more than responsible congressional hearings and debate would. It is hardly a secret that the United States is considering a range of policy options, including military operations, when it comes to Iraq. And the argument that an open discussion of military action could, in effect, become self-fulfilling is too circular to be credible. I am concerned with the dangers posed by Saddam Hussein, as well as with the humanitarian situation in Iraq. But I am also very concerned about the constitutional issues at stake here.”