What Does It Mean to Be a Democrat or Republican on Syria?

Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell address the audience at the 50th annual Kentucky Country Ham Breakfast, Thursday, Aug. 22, 2013, at the Kentucky State Fairgrounds in Louisville, Ky.
National Journal
Michael Catalin
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Michael Catalin
Sept. 4, 2013, 3:23 p.m.

As Con­gress wrestles with wheth­er to pun­ish Syr­ia, the ques­tion has scrambled what it tra­di­tion­ally means to be a Demo­crat or Re­pub­lic­an on for­eign policy, as law­makers forge un­likely — and some­times awk­ward — al­li­ances.

There was a time when, gen­er­ally speak­ing, many Re­pub­lic­ans wanted to change hearts and minds, over­throw dic­tat­ors, and spread demo­cracy. Sim­il­arly, many Demo­crats wanted to avoid hos­til­it­ies where U.S. in­terests are tan­gen­tial and seek broad in­ter­na­tion­al con­sensus be­fore com­mit­ting armed forces.

Today, those lines are far less dis­tinct.

Ex­hib­it A presen­ted it­self this week when Pres­id­ent Obama’s con­gres­sion­al foils, House Speak­er John Boehner and Ma­jor­ity Lead­er Eric Can­tor, an­nounced their sup­port for the pres­id­ent’s call for a mil­it­ary strike against Syr­i­an dic­tat­or Bashar al-As­sad.

Adding fur­ther con­trast, Sen­ate Minor­ity Lead­er Mitch Mc­Con­nell, after a meet­ing with con­gres­sion­al col­leagues at the White House this week, said he wanted more in­form­a­tion on the pres­id­ent’s plan. (An aide to Mc­Con­nell said he could not provide an up­date on the Ken­tucky Re­pub­lic­an’s po­s­i­tion, even after three Re­pub­lic­ans voted with the Demo­crat­ic ma­jor­ity in the Sen­ate For­eign Re­la­tions Com­mit­tee to ad­vance a res­ol­u­tion au­thor­iz­ing the use of force to the floor.)

Re­pub­lic­an Reps. Tom Cot­ton of Arkan­sas and Mike Pom­peo of Kan­sas pub­lished an op-ed in The Wash­ing­ton Post sup­port­ive of the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s pro­pos­al but also thor­oughly skep­tic­al of the pres­id­ent.

“We un­der­stand why many of our GOP col­leagues are un­de­cided about a use-of-force res­ol­u­tion. In­deed, we have re­ser­va­tions about the pres­id­ent’s im­plied course of mil­it­ary ac­tion,” the con­gress­men wrote. “Yet Con­gress has its own con­sti­tu­tion­al duty to de­fend U.S. in­terests, and those in­terests shouldn’t be neg­lected simply be­cause we have doubts about Obama.”

Al­though the two law­makers back the strike, it is far from cer­tain that a House GOP Con­fer­ence whose de­fault po­s­i­tion is to block Obama will get on board. In a sign of just how tox­ic it is for Re­pub­lic­ans to back the pres­id­ent, Boehner said he would not whip an au­thor­iz­a­tion vote, say­ing it was the White House’s job.

Both Pom­peo and Cot­ton, who is run­ning for the Sen­ate against con­ser­vat­ive Demo­crat­ic in­cum­bent Mark Pry­or in 2014, hold tea-party in­flu­enced views on so­cial and fisc­al is­sues but are a world away from fel­low tea-party con­ser­vat­ives like Sen Rand Paul, R-Ky., who dis­agrees with the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s as­sess­ment that a strike would help se­cure al­lies in the re­gion. Paul also rep­res­ents a con­sti­tu­tion­al­ist wing in his party that puts him par­tic­u­larly at odds with hawk­ish Re­pub­lic­ans. For in­stance, Paul on Wed­nes­day offered an amend­ment to the Sen­ate’s res­ol­u­tion in com­mit­tee — it was de­feated — that would have un­der­scored Con­gress’s power to de­clare war.

“It should be made ex­pli­cit that the Con­sti­tu­tion in­ves­ted the power to go to war in Con­gress,” Paul said.

Of course, the con­trast is not just seen among Re­pub­lic­ans. Demo­crats are also di­vided. At Wed­nes­day’s Sen­ate For­eign Re­la­tions hear­ing, Sens. Tom Ud­all of New Mex­ico and Chris Murphy of Con­necti­c­ut voted against their party to send a res­ol­u­tion au­thor­iz­ing force to the Sen­ate floor.

“I know none of us want to be in­volved in a long-term con­flict in Syr­ia,” Murphy said. “I worry that the res­ol­u­tion and au­thor­iz­a­tion today would make it dif­fi­cult for us to avoid that real­ity.”

Some Demo­crats are torn between loy­alty to Obama and a philo­soph­ic­al ob­jec­tion to the use of force to meet the chal­lenges in Syr­ia. At Wed­nes­day’s House For­eign Af­fairs Com­mit­tee hear­ing, Demo­crat­ic law­makers raised ques­tions about Amer­ica’s role in oust­ing As­sad.

“The situ­ation in Syr­ia is that of a na­tion­al civil war, an eth­nic and sec­tari­an con­flict, that Amer­ica can­not solve and should not try to,” said Rep. Bri­an Hig­gins, D-N.Y.

In­deed, House Minor­ity Lead­er Nancy Pelosi, D-Cal­if., is try­ing to sort out her mem­bers’ po­s­i­tions. “Please of­fer fur­ther sug­ges­tions or ideas you may have as to what you can sup­port, so I can con­vey your con­cerns to the White House,” Pelosi wrote in a let­ter to her col­leagues.

Prac­tic­ally speak­ing, aides and polit­ic­al-sci­ence ex­perts say they ex­pect the Sen­ate will take up the res­ol­u­tion, but the ques­tion is un­clear in the House.

The co­ali­tion of Re­pub­lic­ans and Demo­crats that would be needed to send the res­ol­u­tion to the pres­id­ent’s desk amounts to a vote-counter’s night­mare, sug­gests Rut­gers polit­ic­al-sci­ence pro­fess­or Ross Baker.

“The prob­lem the pres­id­ent faces in the House is not a prob­lem of adding votes, but rather he con­fronts a sub­trac­tion prob­lem: sub­tract the liber­tari­an/tea-party people in the right wing of the Re­pub­lic­an Con­fer­ence and the Code Pink/Mo­ve­On fac­tion of the Demo­crat­ic caucus and you barely have enough per­suad­ables to reach 218,” Baker said.

What We're Following See More »
TRUMP CONTINUES TO LAWYER UP
Kasowitz Out, John Dowd In
1 days ago
THE LATEST

As the Russia investigation heats up, "the role of Marc E. Kasowitz, the president’s longtime New York lawyer, will be significantly reduced. Mr. Trump liked Mr. Kasowitz’s blunt, aggressive style, but he was not a natural fit in the delicate, politically charged criminal investigation. The veteran Washington defense lawyer John Dowd will take the lead in representing Mr. Trump for the Russia inquiry."

Source:
ALSO INQUIRES ABOUT PARDON POWER
Trump Looking to Discredit Mueller
1 days ago
THE LATEST

President Trump's attorneys are "actively compiling a list of Mueller’s alleged potential conflicts of interest, which they say could serve as a way to stymie his work." They plan to argued that Mueller is going outside the scope of his investigation, in inquiring into Trump's finances. They're also playing small ball, highlighting "donations to Democrats by some of" Mueller's team, and "an allegation that Mueller and Trump National Golf Club in Northern Virginia had a dispute over membership fees when Mueller resigned as a member in 2011." Trump is said to be incensed that Mueller may see his tax returns, and has been asking about his power to pardon his family members.

Source:
INCLUDES NY PROBE INTO MANAFORT
Why Yes, Mueller Is Looking into Trump Businesses
1 days ago
THE LATEST

In addition to ties between Russia and the Trump campaign, Robert Mueller's team is also "examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe. FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development in New York with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow, and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said. The investigation also has absorbed a money-laundering probe begun by federal prosecutors in New York into Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort."

Source:
Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team is "is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates", including "Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008."

Source:
ANALYSIS FROM CBO
32 Million More Uninsured by 2026 if Obamacare Repealed
1 days ago
THE LATEST

"A Senate bill to gut Obamacare would increase the number of uninsured people by 32 million and double premiums on Obamacare's exchanges by 2026, according to an analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The analysis is of a bill that passed Congress in 2015 that would repeal Obamacare's taxes and some of the mandates. Republicans intend to leave Obamacare in place for two years while a replacement is crafted and implemented."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login