Sirotablog

By David Sirota
American Prospect - 4/23/04 (Permalink)

The civics lesson of the Iran-Contra scandal was simple: No matter how powerful or well-intentioned, presidents cannot secretly fund wars without the consent of Congress. But according to Bob Woodward’s new book, President Bush apparently never learned that axiom. And now, Congress must demand answers.

Woodward alleges that in July 2002, the president secretly began to finance the war in Iraq with no authorization from Congress. He says $700 million was siphoned from operations against al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and into planning an Iraq invasion. The president allegedly took the money from one of the two supplemental spending bills passed after September 11 and left lawmakers “totally in the dark.”

If true, the president violated the spirit of the Constitution, which vests the power of the purse with Congress. But his most serious transgression would not be constitutional. As White House spokesman Scott McClellan accurately noted, the president was granted “broad discretion” to spend these emergency funds. The problem is that that “broad discretion” was not a blank check. The spending bills legally required him to notify Congress before diverting money.

As the post-9-11 emergency spending bill mandates, the president is required to “consult with the chairmen and ranking minority members of the Committees on Appropriations prior to the transfer” of any funds. But that never happened, according to Senator Robert Byrd, who as chairman of the Appropriations Committee at the time would have been informed. He said “the White House provided no consultations” about moving funds into Iraq operations. While the administration submitted reports to Congress, it used deliberately vague language, saying only that it was increasing “situational awareness” and “worldwide posture” — but never mentioning Iraq.

The August 2002 spending bill is the same: while it afforded the administration wide latitude, it required the president to consult with Congress and give 15 days’ notice before moving any money. But as one top Democrat reported, “there was no consultation” — and there is no evidence that Congress was notified.

The administration responded to Woodward’s charge with a variety of stories. McClellan did not deny that money was moved but claimed, “Congress was kept fully informed of all expenditures.” He provided no proof. That same day before the Senate, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz also refused to deny funds had been diverted, but tried to absolve the administration by claiming, “No funds were made available that had Iraq as the only objective.” Again, no definitive proof.

National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice said that while she had no details about the $700 million, circumventing Congress was acceptable because resources were only moved “within the entire region” of Asia and the Middle East. But while the Pentagon technically considers Afghanistan and Iraq the same region, the military objectives were far different. Rice then promised that “resources were not taken from Afghanistan” — a point contradicted by the redeployment of U.S. Special Forces from Afghanistan to Iraq in 2002.

These responses are all similar. They do not deny that at least some money was diverted, and they do not provide any proof that the president fulfilled his legal obligations to inform Congress.

Lawmakers now face an important choice: They can either investigate the matter or abdicate their responsibilities. By choosing the latter, however, they will set a frightening precedent that would allow all future administrations to begin funding major military engagements without congressional consent. Such a capitulation would violate a proud democratic tradition and effectively remove the public from decisions of war and peace.

At a time when our soldiers are bravely fighting for freedom and democracy abroad, the American people deserves some of that same courage from Congress here at home.

David Sirota is the director of strategic communications at the Center for American Progress. He formerly served as chief spokesman for Democrats on the U.S. House Appropriations Committee.