How To De-Fund The Escalation

Gareth Porter is a historian and national security policy analyst. His latest book, Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam was published in June 2005. During the Vietnam War, Porter was a Ph.D. candidate specializing in Vietnamese history and politics who debunked the Nixon administration's "bloodbath" argument in a series of articles and monographs.

Democratic congressional leaders have thus far been unable to decide what to do about a president and vice-president who have openly announced their intention to defy the electorate. While the last election rejected our current foreign military adventure, Congress has stopped far short of acting on that sentiment, allowing the Bush administration to continue indefinitely and to even escalate the war. Comments from some Democratic leaders reveal a misunderstanding of the power Congress has in the present situation.

The Democrats have gravitated toward a nonbinding resolution that would do nothing to force George W. Bush to bring the troops home. The Democratic haziness about the options available to end the U.S. occupation of Iraq is exemplified by presidential candidate Joe Biden’s comment last week that Congress can do nothing to stop the war, because, “It's unconstitutional to say, you can go, but we're going to micromanage.”

The Democrats’ real problem appears to be political rather than constitutional: They have convinced themselves that they cannot cut off funds without being accused of failing to keep faith with U.S. troops in Iraq.