"I'm the decision-maker"

President Bush has effectively told Congress to put up or shut up regarding his plan to increase U.S. troops in Iraq by 21,500 in an attempt to bring some semblance of order to Baghdad. I believe this is the first decision the Bush Administration has made since the Fall of Baghdad and the widespread looting began that responds to the realities on the ground. While I was sympathetic to the President's desire to remove Saddam Hussein, this war has undoubtedly been one of the most ineptly executed wars in history. Now that the President is trying to do something to adapt our strategy, he has not committed nearly enough troops, he is placing too much faith in the al-Maliki Government, and Congress (newly invigorated by a Democratic majority) is balking.

The President asked for a chance for his plan to work during the State of the Union speech earlier this week, and if I were in Congress, I would be inclined to support his plan, if only to give the U.S. one last chance to set things right before we will be forced to leave the Iraqis to their own vices. Nevertheless, I am also sympathetic to the concerns of the vast majority of Representatives and Senators who are finally standing up and letting their voices be heard. Now that they are providing oversight of the war, it is hardly constructive for the President to demand his critics put forward their own plan or remain silent.

The President is indeed the Commander-in-Chief and the decision-maker regarding how best to conduct military operations in a theatre of war, but this fact cuts both ways. He can't expect alternative war plans and strategies from the Congress. That is not the role of Congress. There is one Commander, and that is the President. But Congress holds the purse strings, and the Constitution empowers Congress with oversight of Administration activities and organization of the military. While Congress cannot force the Administration to abandon its current plan to increase troop levels, Congress does have the capabilities of refusing funding for new troop levels or passing restrictive legislation regulating the use of the military, e.g., limits on where the Army can be deployed.

It seems the President can irritate Congress further and risk legislation that would effectively shut down any further U.S. involvement in Iraq, or he can work with Senators and Representatives to address their concerns. Despite Kelly's ruminations to the contrary, this is far from a monarchy and the Presidency is only one of three co-equal branches.