Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) vs. James Baker III on Revised War Powers Act

by | Mar 6, 2009 | Stress Blog | 1 comment

Note the presence of the brilliant Daniel McAdams backing up Dr. Paul and the ungentlemanly belligerence of Baker.

Note also that Baker’s argument rests on the premise that the constitution is dead and that without the War Powers Act, or his new replacement for it, there would be no restriction on presidential war making whatsoever – Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution, among others, notwithstanding.

Paul is right, as usual. The War Powers Act – which “allows” the president to start wars for 60 days before Congress can assemble to swing their rubber stamp and “support the troops” – should be repealed and replaced with nothing but the perpetual threat of impeachment.

Baker’s plan is no substitute for an actual rule of law. (Ha.)

Listen to The Scott Horton Show