Last week, Hillary Clinton brought up a point at a debate that hasn’t generated nearly enough attention: “[Bush] has continued to say he can enter into an agreement with the Iraqi government, without bringing it for approval to the United States Congress, that would continue America’s presence in Iraq long after President Bush leaves office. I find that absolutely unacceptable, and I think we have to do everything we can to prevent President Bush from binding the hands of the next president.” She re-emphasized it this week, noting that the president is “intent upon negotiating a long-term agreement with Iraq which would have permanent bases, permanent troop presence,” without congressional permission.
Other lawmakers seem to be picking up on the scope of the problem.
Several House members strongly urged the Bush administration Wednesday to seek congressional approval for any agreement with Iraq defining the two nations’ political, economic and security relationship in the years ahead.
At a joint hearing of two House Foreign Affairs subcommittees, Democrats criticized the White House’s apparent plan to negotiate and implement such an agreement without congressional input or ratification. And one Republican on the panel described widespread GOP bristling at the administration’s disregard for Congress on important issues like this.
“I am a Republican, and at times I am embarrassed by the lack of cooperation that this president and his appointees have had with the legislative branch,” said Dana Rohrabacher of California. “There is a seething resentment by members of Congress who are Republicans by the fact that this administration has not even cooperated with us, much less with . . . members of some other party.”
By “some other party,” I assume Rohrabacher is referring to the congressional majority, but nevertheless, his point is well taken. The Bush White House, which has always considered Congress more of a nuisance than a co-equal branch of government, isn’t even communicating with Republicans anymore.
And given Article II, Sec. 2 of the Constitution, Bush’s plans for an “arrangement” with Iraq aren’t going over well on the Hill.
The administration plans to finish writing by July a U.S.-Iraq pact that would cover relations between the two countries from 2009 onward.
In November, President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki signed a “declaration of principles” setting forth the broad outlines of the agreement. The most controversial element would provide “security assurances and commitments” to help Iraq with its internal and external defenses against a wide array of enemies.
In announcing the agreement last fall, the president’s top adviser on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Lt. Gen. Douglas E. Lute, told reporters he did not believe the agreement would constitute “a formal treaty, which would then bring us to formal negotiations or formal inputs from Congress.”
But Democrats in both chambers are lining up behind measures that would effectively require congressional approval of any U.S.-Iraq agreement…. “The White House should be on notice that as a prerequisite to any agreement making the kind of commitments envisioned in the declaration of principles, Congress must be an integral part of the discussions and negotiations from the beginning,” said Bill Delahunt , D-Mass., chairman of the International Organizations panel.
He added that he has found no evidence of such consultation with Congress and that the administration declined invitations to four officials to testify about the issue.
Of course it did.
The WaPo’s Ruth Marcus wrote a year ago this week, “[In a nutshell,] this executive branch treats its supposedly equal partner: as an annoying impediment to the real work of government. It provides information to Congress grudgingly, if at all. It handles letters from lawmakers like junk mail, routinely tossing them aside without responding.”
It’s only gotten worse since then. If Congress doesn’t want it to continue, and establish a feckless precedent, lawmakers are going to have to start pushing back in earnest.