The House continues to debate the president's plan to increase troops in Iraq, but what's the point of a nonbinding resolution? Ken Rudin discusses the debate with Farai Chideya.
FARAI CHIDEYA, host: From NPR News, this is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Farai Chideya.</s>Representative STENY HOYER (Democrat, Maryland): Do you approve of the president's proposal to deploy more than 20,000 additional troops in Iraq, or do you not? Thus, this resolution is a clarifying moment for the members to say precisely where they stand on the president's plan.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That was House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on the floor of the House this week. Democrats have introduced a non-binding resolution that, if it passes, will criticize the president's latest Iraq plan. But the bill can't stop the proposed troop surge or the funding it requires.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Every member, however, gets five minutes to speak his or her mind. That's made for a blustery debate and some very long days. To help us get a handle on exactly what the debate means, we've got Melissa Harris-Lacewell. She's an associate professor of politics in African-American studies at Princeton University. Melissa, given the weather especially, it's great to talk to you again.</s>Professor MELISSA HARRIS LACEWELL (African-American Studies, Princeton University): Oh, absolutely. Thanks for having me.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Yes, so let's start why this debate is happening now. A similar resolution stalled in the Senate, is that why the House has jumped into the fray?</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: Well, I think there are several reasons why it's happening now. There seems to be an enormous amount of anxiety brewing now in Washington not only around the current war in Iraq, but the possibility of escalating hostilities with Iran. And so the House is seeking to somehow try to gain control of the situation.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: Although this is obviously not something that has teeth from a policy perspective, I think they are hoping through this, you know, analytic opportunity, this chance to take a position, they're hoping to do what presidents often do, which is to use the bully pulpit. In other words, to mobilize public opinion in order to keep the president from moving forward.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Republicans are none too happy about this resolution. We've got a little bit from Jack Kingston of Georgia.</s>Representative. JACK KINGSTON (Republican, Georgia): Our job is to pay us real legislation and make real laws. We don't have to vent our frustration. We can change policy. This week's resolution is just a cover your rear end political design to give the legislative branch a chance to say I told you so.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now Melissa, does Congressman Kingston have a point?</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: I suspect there's a little bit of that. But I think what the congressman is missing in a particular analysis is that there was, after all, a midterm election in 2006 which was widely regarded as a referendum on the war in Iraq in which the Democrat won handily.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: So there, you know, in a democracy, yes, it is the responsibility of the legislative branch in America to make laws. But it's also the responsibility of elected officials to respond to the public opinion that is communicated through elections.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: And so the administration's unwillingness to respond to the American public's desire to deescalate the war requires that Congress do something to try to once again communicate that to the White House.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now you have a situation where part of the Democrat's entry into power was based on opposition to the war by the U.S. public, who felt very strongly, overwhelmingly that we had gone off course. Do Republicans now feel any pressure, you think, to support this non-binding resolution even if it means going against the head of their own party?</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: Well, there were a few Republicans who are breaking ranks, and, you know, are joining the Democrats. I think there's 11 who were indicating support of the defeat - excuse me, indicating support of the Iraq resolution.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: That said, it kind of depends on whether or not these Republicans are in safe districts. In other words, districts where they're most likely to be re-elected in the next two years as Republicans because they're in the safe, strong Republican districts; or if they are in this districts that are more swing districts where there are voters on both sides. So in that case this is a political calculation.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So we just heard from a Republican. Now we turn to a Democrat. From the other side of the aisle, it's Congresswoman Maxine Waters, and she's the co-founder of the Out of Iraq Caucus.</s>Representative MAXINE WATERS (Democrat, California): Madam Speaker, I support this resolution hoping this will be a first step in ending this war and reuniting our troops with their families and loved ones. This is a non-binding resolution. The real test with this Congress is going to be whether or not we will continue to fund this war.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now Melissa, do you think that the Democrats have the power or the moxie to really cut off funding to the war?</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: You know, I have to say that given the history of the war in Vietnam, which continues to probably be the central anxiety point for lawmakers around this war. And so you keep saying it every time someone talks about not supporting the war, there's a rush to say but we support the troops.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: And the problem with cutting off funding is that there's simply no way then to distinguish between the troops and the war. So, I think it is highly unlikely that there is any political elected official who wants to be standing in the position of saying there are troops dying in Iraq and we're unwilling to write the check.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So it's kind of a linguistic tightrope, isn't it then? Supporting the troops, ending the war, cutting funds. It's really something that seems to be a real puzzle box for any politician of any stripe.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: I mean, I think that what the Congress is really trying to do more than anything is to affect the one person who can truly affect what's going on, and that's the president, the White House. It is the White House and its empowerment as the leader of any military operation who is empowered to make these choices.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: And, by the way, the Congress gave over an enormous amount of power post-9/11. You know, they were trying to walk away from that now, but the Congress gave an enormous power post-9/11 to the executive branch. So what they're trying to do right now is to somehow influence the White House.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: The problem with it is that this is the president who is now in his last two years, who doesn't have to run for re-election, who has no member of his administration running in 2008, and therefore is largely free of the kind of political considerations that congresspersons who are going to be standing for re-election have to consider.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, let's get a little bit of words from the president, who spoke yesterday about the very things you're talking about.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: President GEORGE W. BUSH: Soon Congress is going to be able to vote on a piece of legislation that is binding, a bill providing emergency funding for our troops. Our troops are counting on their elected leaders in Washington D.C. to provide them with the support they need to do their mission.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Melissa, you essentially said that the president doesn't have to be accountable to Congress in some senses because he is at the end or near in the end of his presidency. But he still is someone who has to deal with the public, and the public right now really does not support this war. Is that going to affect his decision-making?</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: Apparently not. I mean, this president, I was just speaking with a group of students about this in terms of trying to think about what are the electoral strategies that are necessary. And this is a president who has really made his electoral success on saying that in a certain way he doesn't care what the public thinks.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: Early on, when there was an enormous outcry before the invasion originally, he said very clearly, look, I don't govern by focus groups. And apparently he doesn't even govern by midterm elections. This is a president who's made a decision about the path that he's going to take and, you know, he can simply write out these poor public opinion ratings because they mean very little for his actual power.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now that may be true for his power, but he still wants Republicans to keep the White House in 2008. And so jumping to the presidential race, you've got Iraq that has been a weighty issue for Democratic candidates who voted for it, a lot of criticism on the road or questioning of Hillary Clinton and John Edwards.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: But could Republican frontrunner John McCain also hit a snag for supporting the president's surge plan. In a way, it's, you know, if you do support, that's one thing and a lot of people are going to be angry at you. And if you don't, that's another thing and people are still going to be angry at you. So how does this play out in the 2000 presidential race - 2008 presidential race?</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: Well, I think that we have to remember a couple of things. One, 2008 is much farther away than we might expect. I mean we're ramping up so much and talking so much about the election right now that it seems like everything that's on the table now will be on the table next winter, during the primaries. But that's not true at all. It's highly likely that these questions are going to have moved off the table and something else will have moved forward. And in fact taking a stand that is against sort of the Democrats may be seen very well by the GOP primary voters who have to make a decision for the nomination.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: McCain also has lots of other weaknesses and so, you know, in many ways, sort of Giuliani is a frontrunner right now. And Giuliani is completely outside of these administrative choices, as is Romney and lots of other Republicans who are running. They're going to be able to say, look, sure, I'm a part of this party. I'm a law and order guy. I'm an anti-terrorist person, but I didn't have anything to do with this war or the administration of this war.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: And in fact, it's all going to be the Democrats who are in much more weakened positions, because most of them are sitting in the Senate right now and having to make a variety of complicated choices that will have to be explained in ways that don't work well in soundbites.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: So the Republicans are actually in pretty good shape come '08 because the Bush administration is not running again.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well finally and briefly, if this resolution passes, which seems likely, will it make a difference at all?</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: In terms of George W. Bush's policies, it does not appear that he is going to respond to either public opinion or congressional sort of censure in this way. He's made a decision about going forward as long as there is an unwillingness to pull back the purse strings. I suspect it will make very little difference in anything other than the political world, but probably not in the actual campaign of the war itself.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Melissa, I have to give you props for joining us today. I know that you had the hustle through the snow on the East Coast, so thanks for joining us again.</s>Prof. HARRIS-LACEWELL: And thank you for having me.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Melissa Harris-Lacewell is an associate professor of politics in African-American Studies at Princeton University.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And just ahead, President Bush answers tough questions from reporters. Later, touching up the No Child Left Behind Act and your letters.