You choose, we deliver
If you are interested in this story, you might be interested in others from The Journal Gazette. Go to www.journalgazette.net/newsletter and pick the subjects you care most about. We'll deliver your customized daily news report at 3 a.m. Fort Wayne time, right to your email.

U.S.

  • ‘SNL’ announcer Don Pardo, 96, dies
    Don Pardo, the “Saturday Night Live” announcer whose career spanned the history of television and who made memorable appearances in skits and music videos that played the booming cadence of his voice for laughs, died Monday at his home in Tucson,
  • Hope, resentment in new charter school landscape
    Nine years after Hurricane Katrina, charter schools are the new reality of public education in New
  • Latest Ferguson protests are smaller, more subdued
    Police and protesters in Ferguson were finally able to share the streets again at night, putting aside for at least a few hours some of the hostility that had filled those hours with tear gas and smoke.
Advertisement
Also
Hoosier lawmakers weigh in on Syria
Here is what federal lawmakers from Indiana said this weekend about President Barack Obama’s request for Congress to consider approving military action against Syria:
Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind.: “The president’s decision to set a ‘red line’ with Syria while failing to have a long-term strategy in place unfortunately has left the U.S. without any good options. I am pleased, however, that President Obama is seeking authorization from Congress for potential military action in Syria so the American people can have a voice in this debate.”
Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-3rd: "I am deeply skeptical of American military involvement in Syria. After ignoring his own ‘red line’ in recent days, President Obama again outlined no clear strategy or objective (Saturday) should we take military action.”
Rep. Jackie Walorski, R-2nd: “The president’s red line was already crossed, yet it still remains unclear how his recent consideration for a ‘limited, narrow act’ will deter the Assad regime, and I look forward to hearing the administration’s specific plan in the coming days.”
Rep. Luke Messer, R-6th: “Given the urgency of this matter, I believe Congress should return immediately to debate and address the issue. Under the circumstances, a nine-day delay is not appropriate. A decision must be made.”

Congress skeptical on Syria

Even narrow approval measure faces long odds

– Leading lawmakers dealt bipartisan rejection Sunday to President Barack Obama’s request to strike Syrian military targets, saying the best hope for congressional approval would be to narrow the scope of the resolution.

From the Democratic dean of the Senate to tea party Republicans in their second terms, lawmakers said the White House’s initial request to use force against Syria will be rewritten in the coming days to try to shore up support in a skeptical Congress. But some veteran lawmakers expressed doubt that even the new use-of-force resolution would win approval, particularly in the House.

“I think it’s going to be a very tough sell,” said Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma who is often a key crossover Republican in compromises with the White House. For now, Cole said he is “leaning no” on approving any use of force against Syria.

His remarks came after a more than 2 1/2 -hour classified briefing that drew nearly 100 lawmakers to the Capitol, flying in from across the country on 24 hours’ notice for a rare Labor Day weekend meeting.

Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind., a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, was among the lawmakers who attended, according to his staff.

The briefing, run by five senior national security officials, began the administration’s all-out effort to win support for what Obama has said would be a limited strike against military targets to punish Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime for carrying out a chemical attack.

White House officials have less than two weeks to secure backing in the House and the Senate, which will not formally return from their regular end-of-summer break until Sept. 9. They are expected to then immediately begin debate on military authorization, with votes by mid-September.

Secretary of State John Kerry, who has been talking to his former colleagues in the Senate, predicted victory during appearances on five Sunday talk shows.

Lawmakers from both parties said Sunday that the administration has presented convincing evidence that Assad’s government carried out the attack, citing Sunday’s closed-door briefing in an auditorium in the Capitol Visitor Center and other classified presentations that they received in the past week.

The key stumbling block, they said, was the concern that a limited strike would not be a deterrent and would only draw the U.S. military deeper into Syria’s civil war.

“I don’t think there’s a lot of doubt that the regime undertook this attack. There’s a great deal of skepticism that a limited strike is likely to be effective,” said Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., a member of the House Intelligence Committee.

The uncertain outcome is rooted in a Congress that has proved deeply factionalized and dysfunctional. With Democrats running the Senate and Republicans the House, the two sides have fought to a near legislative standstill on nearly every major issue.

A proposal to stiffen background checks for gun buyers died in the Senate this spring, despite having the support of 90 percent of the public. A comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws, also backed by a majority of voters, has stalled. Add a heated debate on military action its constitutional underpinnings, and the atmosphere on Capitol Hill could grow even more toxic.

The most difficult hurdle comes in the House, which has been incapable this year of approving what in the past were considered perfunctory measures. The farm bill, usually a bipartisan celebration of agriculture policy, failed in late June.

Compounding the troubles is that the debate on Syria comes just as Congress is poised to renew the fiscal showdown with Obama on federal spending.

The Syria deliberations will not fall along normal ideological lines. Obama cannot count on the near-universal support he usually has among the 201 House Democrats. And, aware of the growing bloc of Republican isolationists, senior GOP aides warned Sunday that a large number of Democrats will have to support the use-of-force resolution for it to have any chance.

Advisers in both parties described the measure as a vote of conscience that House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., will not be lobbying lawmakers to support.

Obama’s allies said the first order of business will be to work with the administration to redraft the resolution, which was sent to Capitol Hill on Saturday night and barely filled one page. It had no prescriptions for what type of military action could be carried out or its duration.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the dean of the Senate and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, told reporters that the resolution is “too open-ended” as written.

“I know it will be amended in the Senate,” he said.

Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said, “That has to be rectified, and they simply said in answer to that they would work with the Congress and try to come back with a more prescribed resolution.”

Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said he will push to add a provision that would limit the length of the mission and prohibit putting U.S. troops on the ground in Syria.

Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., are slated to meet with White House officials today, following their criticism this weekend that the president should be calling for a more expansive attack on Assad’s forces to help push him out of power.

McCain was also critical of the decision to seek congressional approval, pointing to Obama’s declaration months ago that a chemical attack would be a “red line” that, if crossed, would be met with military force.

Advertisement