I'm not sure how that would work. Trump could withdraw from NATO using his executive powers, but Congress would keep funding it?The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation Tuesday evening that seeks to bar President Donald Trump from withdrawing from NATO amid renewed concerns over his commitment to the 29-nation military pact.
In a bipartisan 357-22 vote, the Democrat-led lower chamber sent the Senate the NATO Support Act, which would prohibit the use of federal funds to withdraw from the 70-year-old alliance. Twenty-two Republicans voted no, while 28 Republicans and 26 Democrats did not vote.
[...]
“What we have to realize is that NATO is not just a transactional relationship.” [Rep. Jimmy] Panetta said. “Our sole focus can’t just be on who pays what and who gets what. Being a member of NATO is not like being a member of a country club.”
[...]
[Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot] Engel called splintering the NATO alliance one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s top goals.
[...]
“This bill reiterates Congress' commitment to NATO and would prohibit withdrawal from NATO. It sends a clear message to the administration that this branch of government supports the alliance,” Engel said in a floor speech ahead of the vote.
Defense News
I can see how the Senate bill would do the trick, but can Congress simply usurp an executive power by legislation?This measure and a similar one in the Senate, which would require Trump get two-thirds consent from the Senate to pull America out of NATO, have raised questions about the constitutional separation of powers. The bipartisan Senate bill, led by Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., is cosponsored by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and others.
The sponsors of the House bill expressed optimism the two bills would be reconciled, suggesting that Congress’s power of the purse is solid enough footing to proceed.
What about the 26 Democrats who didn't vote?
A NATO expense primer from CNN.
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.
No comments:
Post a Comment