Avatar feed
Responses: 7
Sgt David Ray
5
5
0
Well, they could refuse to fund those movements and actions.
(5)
Comment
(0)
SGT Mary G.
SGT Mary G.
6 mo
Sgt David Ray Would love to see that come to fruition. However, we the people would pay for it with increased costs and more cheating that business have free rein to refuse to make good on resolving since Consumer Protection effectiveness has been undermined.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
LTC Trent Klug
2
2
0
I disagree with the Senate here. I believe Congress, after the 60 day window, needs to either reign in the president's action, or do an AUMF or declaration of war.
(2)
Comment
(0)
SGM Jeff Mccloud
SGM Jeff Mccloud
6 mo
I haven't looked it up, I just assumed that the "ask for a 30 day extension" was for scenarios like everything in place for strikes, and/or a pause in action, to allow for negotiations that could resolve in under 30 days.
(2)
Reply
(0)
LTC Trent Klug
LTC Trent Klug
6 mo
SGM Jeff Mccloud I think so too.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SGT Mary G.
SGT Mary G.
6 mo
LTC Trent Klug Thank you. That is the reasonable course of action.
Let's inform our Senators that is our advice to them.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
LTC Kevin B.
1
1
0
I recommend you brush up on Congress and "The Power of the Purse".
(1)
Comment
(0)
SGT Mary G.
SGT Mary G.
6 mo
Am I the only one who does not know what OP references?
Is there valid debate about why War Powers Act and OP apparenly are no on the same sheet of music?
Given 47-53, maybe we should encourage our Senators to look more closely at the issue.
(0)
Reply
(0)
LTC Kevin B.
LTC Kevin B.
6 mo
SGT Mary G.

OP=Original Poster

The original poster said Congress plays no role. That’s not true at all. First of all, Congress passed the War Powers Act, which gave the Executive Branch some initial leeway in handling foreign affairs involving military force, but they withheld anything after that. And, Congress does control all funding. So, anyone who says that Congress “doesn’t have any say” is someone who doesn’t understand how our government works.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SGT Mary G.
SGT Mary G.
6 mo
LTC Kevin B. - Thank you for the clarification about OP.
Well, if Congress is not responsible for allocating budgetary funding who is. That is supposedly common knowledge. Maybe it is about the sourcing of the funds Congress does not do for the budget?
I'm going to guess that at least one Congressional committee (or advisorry Senate Committee) may have been cleared to fund for . . . I don't know what else to label ot other than "black ops" i.e. secret fundings for secret projects.
Or else all of Congress has to agree to add bogus amounts here and there to items in the budget that are not itemized. Or maybe they simply buy into what seems like excessive budgetary costs because they know it is useless to question them?
The public speaks up though and it contributes to Congress being considered ineffective when they do not provide answers for unaccounted for inflated costs.

I suppose "the big beautiful budget" is full of the "none of your business"/need to know type inflated items, that no one is considered to have a need to know.<sigh>
(0)
Reply
(0)
LTC Kevin B.
LTC Kevin B.
5 mo
SGT Mary G. - Congress is responsible for allocating funding.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close