War Powers and Buy-In by Congress

Tim Kaine, when he was Virginia’s governor, was one of the first Democrats to back Barack Obama for his party’s presidential nomination over Hillary Clinton, the presumed nominee, in early 2008. There was even talk among the political chattering class that Kaine would be Obama’s running mate.

After winning the White House, Obama tapped Kaine to serve as chairman of the Democratic National Committee. And in 2012, when Democrat Jim Webb stunned the party by choosing not to run for re-election, the president prevailed upon his friend to run to keep the seat in Democratic hands.

With that personal history, no one could be faulted for cynically contending that Kaine, as Virginia’s junior U.S. senator, would be little more than a “yes” man for the president on all issues, big and small.

Partisans can argue whether that’s the case on any number of domestic issues, but on the big questions of war and peace, domestic security and foreign leadership, Kaine is anything but the White House’s man in the Senate, which is a good thing for the nation.

Since last summer, even as U.S. combat missions were winding down in Iraq and Afghanistan, President Obama was ramping up American actions against ISIS, or the so-called Islamic State.

ISIS suddenly appeared on the scene, first in Syria and then in northwestern Iraq, routing opponents and gaining control of key cities and territories. Its forces were rapidly converging on Baghdad itself, and its atrocities against Yazidis had grabbed the West’s attention. And then came the beheadings of Western captives.

Using powers given by Congress to the president in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Obama announced a major campaign against ISIS. From aircraft carriers based in the region, the U.S. began thousands of sorties against ISIS forces.

Practically from the moment Obama announced his campaign against ISIS, Kaine began pressing him to come to Congress to seek a new “authorization for use of military force.” ISIS, Kaine pointed out, wasn’t even in existence when Congress passed the 9/11 AUMF and had nothing to do with al-Qaida’s attacks on the U.S. Getting the support of the American people, through the buy-in of Congress, for any commitment of U.S. forces inevitably strengthens the hand of a president, Kaine argued.

He’s right, of course, and finally last week, the White House sent its proposed AUMF to Congress for action. More than six ... six ... months after the U.S. military began its campaign against ISIS.

The needed debate has already begun. Democrats contend the wording of the resolution is too vague and open-ended, while Republicans argue it hamstrings the Pentagon and micromanages the commanders in the field.

The back-and-forth will continue for the next several weeks, but the important thing is that Congress is debating how the U.S. is to confront the growing threat of ISIS. But what is important is that the White House has finally engaged with Congress on this key foreign policy challenge.

And we have Sen. Tim Kaine to thank.

###