Posts
Introduction
This is the
unedited paper I wrote for my senior seminar back in 2007. I am posting it as a sort of trip down memory
lane during our current apocalypse.
I have
become a better writer since creating this.
I have
become much better informed since writing this.
I am a very
different person than when I wrote this.
------------------------------------------------
Non Binding Resolutions
A current moral fad within the current
Congress is the non-binding resolution.
A subject so historically absent and forgotten I actually had to search
multiple Congressional dictionaries to find the term defined.
A Non binding resolution is an expression of
general opinion within a body of Congress.
The opinions can concern political issues, internal issues, or a goal of
the House.[1] The idea of ending poverty or drug use in
America would be an example of a goal oriented resolution, though since these
are not recorded thoroughly, I have been unable to find evidence that this has
ever happened. In serving the American
public more constructive forms of use also occur through resolutions, as they
can be used to the appointment of special and short term committees.
As there is no legal weight the function of
the Resolution is to be symbolic.
However since they do not actually do anything, and the Congress is able
to do actual functions with the considerable power they yield as it springs
forth from the Constitution, more often when non-binding resolutions are looked
at, they are at best seen as scarecrows by the American public, taking on the
appearance of a threat or the pledge to explore more activity. When viewed most negatively, they are seen as
false posturing, an attempt to use a current issue to gain a quick political
boon without any substantive effort toward forming a solution.
I can not find a single target of these resolutions in
my research. And this leads me to
conclude one of two things. Either they
were not used in the past, or they were not considered worth analysis in modern
times, and forgotten. In the long run of
history it could be said that such resolutions lack any symbolic weight at all,
serving solely as holograms of actual political maneuvering.
How does Congressional budgeting affect the process of making war?
One of the functions pertaining to the
military most clearly defined within the Constitution related to the actions of
Congress is the maintaining of a Navy, and the supporting and raising of
armies.[2] They are the providers of the military for
which the President is the decider. If
the United States Congress wished it could choose not to raise or maintain a
military, and could withdraw funds from the current military. No gasoline for tanks, no bombs for the
aircraft. Warfare could be halted
because the Congress does not provide the equipment necessary for the conflict
to take place.
During the Viet Nam Conflict, or as it is
known in the popular vernacular the Viet Nam War, Congress used their ability
to neglect the military to end aggressive movements into the nation of
Cambodia, a boarder nation of Viet Nam and a haven for forces that were
striking against American forces. The
attacks on Cambodia were seen by the Congress as an unnecessary escalation of
conflict within the War, and they chose not to support such efforts. This removal of funds is the only instance I
could find of Congress using this ability to proper effect.
Though this tightening of money expenditures
was successful in Viet Nam, the effort was a rare occurrence and serves more
appropriately as an anomaly in procedural structure than an example of
governance working correctly.
______________________________
If
you like or hate this please take the time to comment, share on Twitter (click that link to follow me), Tumblr, or Facebook, and otherwise distribute my opinion to the world.
I would appreciate it.
No comments:
Post a Comment