Posted on 04/20/2015 5:01:56 AM PDT by lifeofgrace
Sen. Bob Corker has authored a bill to hand President Obama the Imperium Magnum—in Rome it was called “dictator”—in regards to his caplituating “deal” with Iran. In doing so, he has not only trashed the Constitution, but also the Senate’s own rules, bestowing an authority never intended for the chief executive to possess.
The Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has authority, by Senate Rule XXX, to act upon treaties, but Corker, along with Sen. Robert Menendez and 91%-certain-to-be-running-for-president Sen. Lindsey Graham, have come up with a scheme to make it appear as if the Senate opposed Obama’s nuclear dalliance with Iran’s regime, while actually being bridesmaids to the espousal.
And of course, Obama himself has signaled he’s willing to sign the instrument of his nomination as dictator. The Constitution, sadly for Corker and his consigliere, stands in the way of this travesty, but who cares about the Constitution lately? Andrew C. McCarthy laments:
To summarize, the Constitution puts the onus on the president to find 67 Senate votes to approve an international agreement, making it virtually impossible to ratify an ill-advised deal. The Corker bill puts the onus on Congress to muster 67 votes to block an agreement.Not only does Corker’s Iran bill despoil the Constitution, it also ignores the Senate’s own rules. The Congressional Research Service does great work keeping track of such intricate procedural particulars.Under the Constitution, Obama’s Iran deal would not have a prayer. Under the Corker bill, it would sail through. And once again, it would be Republicans first ensuring that self-destruction is imposed on us, then striking the pose of dogged opponents by casting futile nay votes.
This is not how our system works. Congress is supposed to make the laws we live under. It is the first branch of government, not a rubber-stamping Supreme Soviet.
The Foreign Relations Committee can order the treaty reported back to the Senate—favorably, unfavorably, or without recommendation—or, instead, decline to act on the treaty. If the committee does not act on the treaty, it is not automatically returned to the President. Treaties, unlike bills and other legislative measures, remain available to the Senate from one Congress to the next until they are disposed or the Senate agrees to return them to the President. Paragraph 2 of Rule XXX states in part that “all proceedings on treaties shall terminate with the Congress, and they shall be resumed at the commencement of the next Congress as if no proceedings had previously been had thereon.” Thus, if the Foreign Relations Committee fails to report a treaty before the end of a Congress, the treaty remains before the committee during the next Congress. If the committee has reported a treaty, but the Senate has not completed floor consideration of it when the Congress ends, the treaty is recommitted to the committee, and the committee must report it again before the Senate may consider it on the floor.Nowhere does CRS report that the Senate can simply grant carte blanche to the president. Ahh, but it’s not the Senate, it’s both the House and the Senate which together are betraying the Constitution. McCarthy again:
Thus, the Constitution mandates that no international agreement can be binding unless it achieves either of two forms of congressional endorsement: a) super-majority approval by two-thirds of the Senate (i.e., 67 aye votes), or b) enactment through the normal legislative process, meaning passage by both chambers under their burdensome rules, then signature by the president. (emphasis mine)So, Congress wants to pass a bill authorizing the president to submit a treaty to Congress, and it’s automatically approved, without consideration, unless Congress acts to block it.
Once the deal is submitted, Congress would have 60 days (or perhaps as few as 30 days) to act. If within that period both houses of Congress failed to enact a resolution of disapproval, the agreement would be deemed legally binding — meaning that the sanctions the Iranian regime is chafing under would be lifted.Even ancient Rome realized that the powers of a dictator should be limited—the Roman Senate generally granted six month appointments, but what Corker has proposed to give Obama as dictator seems chillingly similar to Rome’s system.
Unlike the Consuls, who were required to cooperate with the Senate, the Dictator could act on his own authority without the Senate, though the Dictator would usually act in unison with the Senate all the same. There was no appeal from the sentence of the Dictator (unless the dictator changed his mind), and accordingly the lictors bore the axes in the fasces before them, even in the city, as a symbol of their absolute power over the lives of the citizens.It’s no wonder that the Fasces on the House floor have axes, but we never expected them to be employed so literally.
Where is Robert Byrd when we need him?
The good senator must be smoking some of those "funny" cigs. (Yes, I know it's /Sark, but its still STUPID!!)
Even a high school civics student with a D- average knows that the Senate approves treaties. Such knowledge, however, is beyond the grasp of our sitting Senators.
Not ONE has spoken out on this that I know of.
With his support for this bill, will the indictment against Menendez suddenly go away?
This is another step toward tyranny. The German Reichstag did it in one big jump with Hitler’s “enabling act.” We are doing it with a series of measures. The outcome will be the same.
What amazes me, too, is that it is proof of a huge, anti-Jewish vote in the US Senate.
Keep your powder dry; you’re going to need it. And sooner rather than later.
Remember to vote Republican in 2016. Keep them in control of the senate. /sarc
Rand Paul voted for it.
Will Cruz step up and filibuster?
I think people just throw things at the wall to see if it would stick....
The American people wouldn’t stand for something like this, unless Jade Helm takes over and takes all our arms away...
But the people of Arizona,(McCain)Nevada (Harry Reid)Utah (Orrin Hatch)know they need to get rid of these ‘nest holders’ and we need a new life line in our government, so start voting these people out and lets set term limits....
A dictator?
Well, all he needs is the “tator,” ‘cause he’s already a...
...awh, never mind.
Mark Levin has more than spoken out on this.
But maybe you mean no politician has?
Yes, I was speaking of the Senate. I agree that Levin has spoken out. (However, if you check the record, Free Republic was speaking out before anyone else.)
Of course FR was first.
Limbaugh lashing the Corker bill now.
Finally.
So did Ted Cruz.
LOL! You are reliable, young lady. Glad to hear Limbaugh has read up on the Senate and treaties over the weekend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.