More information becomes available about Obama’s strategy for dealing with ISIS. In essence, he wants money.
Approving the fund could allow the White House and congressional leaders to escape a tougher vote on authorizing or funding military action before the midterm elections but still achieve the “buy in” the president has said he wants from Congress.
At the same time, the request risks opening the White House up to attacks that it is asking for a blank check from Congress to carry out military action. It’s also unclear whether the counterterrorism proposal would be enough for the administration to decimate ISIS.
This is shaping up to be a shameful exercise on the part of all concerned. Obama, whose prevarications and misjudgments allowed the formation and metastasis of ISIS, has no real intention of taking any action that has a reasonable prospect of eradicating this regional threat. Instead of an actual plan or even the acknowledgement that a plan would be good to have we get gibberish about “degrade and destroy” and “decimate.”
From the GOP side of the aisle, there seems to be little stomach for actually taking a stand.
A year after opposition in Congress thwarted plans for missile strikes in Syria, the White House is again putting the issue of military force in the Middle East before a skeptical Congress and a war-weary public.
Mr. Obama has not indicated yet whether he will seek congressional authorization, though he said Saturday he would like “buy-in” for a broader campaign, which the White House so far has not defined.
Democratic leaders in the Senate and Republican leaders in the House want to avoid a public vote to authorize force, fearing the unknown political consequences eight weeks before the midterm elections on Nov. 4.
“A lot of people would like to stay on the sideline and say, ‘Just bomb the place and tell us about it later,’ ” said Representative Jack Kingston, Republican of Georgia, who supports having an authorization vote. “It’s an election year. A lot of Democrats don’t know how it would play in their party, and Republicans don’t want to change anything. We like the path we’re on now. We can denounce it if it goes bad, and praise it if it goes well and ask what took him so long.”
This is echoed by the LA Times:
While members of Congress are eager to debate the White House’s strategy against the militant group …read more