Tina Smith: Congress shouldn’t be pushed to sidelines after Iran bombing

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of commentary online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

The bombing runs targeting Iran fueled a fiery debate ranging from the actual damage (or lack thereof) to Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons.

But the military maneuver also generated controversy on another front, reigniting a long-simmering debate over the executive branch’s authority to conduct a mission like this without congressional involvement.

“The U.S. Constitution divides war powers between the executive and legislative branches. Article 1, Section 8, gives Congress the power to declare war, ‘raise and support armies,’ maintain the navy, and establish rules and regulations for both,“ according to the American Bar Association.

“Article II, Section 2 gives the president unspecified powers as ‘Commander in Chief,’” permitting the president “to respond to sudden attacks” and providing “some defensive war powers.”

In Congress, resolutions and legislation were quickly rolled out recently to rein in future military missions over Iran without the legislative branch’s involvement (with certain exceptions, such as defense against an imminent attack). A resolution introduced by Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., had an expedited path to a floor vote for procedural reasons. The Senate voted early Friday evening to reject that measure. Another, a bill introduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., faces serious headwinds with Republican congressional majorities.

Four members of Minnesota’s congressional delegation have expressed support for “war powers” measures. Reps. Betty McCollum and Rep. Ilhan Omar, both Democrats, are cosponsoring a U.S. House resolution authored by Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., while Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Tina Smith backed Kaine’s Senate resolution.

Smith has gone a step further. She is one of seven co-authors of Sanders’ “No War Against Iran Act,” which has similar aims as Kaine’s resolution but specifically calls for prohibiting “the use of funds for military force against Iran.”

I spoke with Smith this week — before the Senate voted on Kaine measure — to better understand her concerns and why she’s supporting both high-profile Senate war powers initiatives. (Klobuchar’s office said Thursday she is reviewing the Sanders bill.)

Here’s my exchange with Smith, edited for length:

Q. You’re backing both the Kaine and Sanders war powers measures. Tell me why.

A. When I think about what is happening in Iran I think first that it is extremely important that Iran not become a nuclear power. … [T]hey pose a threat that we have to take seriously. I also believe very strongly that the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. And it is unacceptable for Congress and the American people to be cut out of the debate about whether the United States is going to go to war or get into a significant conflict with Iran. … The decision to bomb Iran is risky, it’s reckless. We don’t know what is going to happen, and that decision should not ever be made without full participation by Congress.

Q. The bombers have returned from their mission. Republicans control both chambers of Congress, so passage of either measure is daunting at best. Could critics argue that the Kaine resolution or the Sanders bill is symbolic or even theater?

A. The first point I want to make [is that] we don’t know where this is going. We don’t know what will happen next. We don’t know what damage has been done to Iran’s nuclear capacity, nor do we know what other ripple effects this might have in the region. We don’t know what security threats exist today that are worse than they were before this bombing. … So my job as a senator is to protect the safety and security of my constituents and all of America. So I am exercising my rights and my responsibility through my vote on this resolution and also on my support for the Sanders bill.

The second thing I would say [is that] the Trump administration continually treats Congress, the representatives of the people of this country, as just a hassle to be ignored. They are saying … “How dare you challenge our decision-making here, how dare you not just take our word for it? We’re not gonna give you the intelligence you are due because we’re not gonna give it to you.“ They delayed the security briefing for Congress until [Thursday]. So there is basically a dismissal of the role of Congress and our job to protect our constituents. … So to use our power to push against that is extremely important.”

Q. Could critics argue your support for this suggests that you’re anti-Israel or not sufficiently pro-Israel, which could concern some constituents?

A. Well that would just be not true. This is why I started with my first point, which is I recognize Iran to be a threat to the region and I believe strongly that Iran should not be allowed to have nuclear weapons. I have strongly supported the use of diplomacy to achieve that end … .

I always pay close attention to what comes into my office in terms of outreach from Minnesotans. It’s interesting to me that roughly 10 times the number of people have written or called our office saying they’re opposed to this bombing and they’re opposed to a war with Iran, as opposed to those who have have called in with support. And that I think is consistent with what we see nationally with how Americans feel about getting into a sustained conflict with Iran. Again, it’s important just to remember we don’t know where this is going to go. We don’t know what is going to happen.

Q. It does appear that President Donald Trump, under Article 2, has the authority to launch a military operation independent of Congress. Other presidents have wielded similar Article 2 authority, such as Barack Obama did when he targeted Osama bin Laden. How would you respond to concerns that the war powers measures are partisan?

A. I think it’s important context that both the Kaine and the Sanders bill make it clear that the president has the power and should have the power to act. If he is acting in [the country’s] self-defense and sending American troops in to defend the security of the United States … that’s a very important exception that needs to be preserved. But at the end of the day … Iran is … a major threat. If the United States of America is going to enter into a war with Iran, then Congress needs to have a voice in that and should not be just pushed to the sidelines. I think that’s the case regardless of who the president is.

Imagine what would have happened if a President Joe Biden had unilaterally bombed Iran and what Republicans in the Senate would have done. All hell would have broken loose. And yet, we’ll see what happens with the votes. Based on what I’m hearing, I would be surprised if the majority of Republicans in the United States Senate voted to exercise their congressional authority by supporting the resolution.