Washington ( CNN ) -- As Congress debates the size and scope of defense budgets in a looming age of austerity , one senator is seeking to resolve a much older question about the president 's ability to exercise military power without the consent of the House and Senate . Sen. Jim Webb , D-Virginia , has introduced legislation requiring explicit congressional approval of future U.S. humanitarian or peacekeeping operations involving the military and likely hostilities . The measure would not apply to instances where there 's an imminent threat to the United States , U.S. allies or American citizens . Under the terms of the bill , co-sponsored by Sen. Mike Lee , R-Utah , both chambers of Congress would be required to vote within 48 hours of a presidential authorization request . `` The question is simple , '' Webb said last week . `` When should the president have the unilateral authority to decide to use military force , and what is the place of the Congress in that process ? Year by year , skirmish by skirmish , the role of the Congress in determining where the U.S. military would operate , and when the awesome power of our weapon systems would be unleashed , has diminished . '' Webb , a former Navy secretary and assistant defense secretary , was strongly critical of President Barack Obama 's decision to intervene militarily in Libya in 2011 without congressional authorization . He has also expressed concern about the possibility of American intervention in the Syrian crisis . Last summer , a sharply divided Congress was unable to pass any legislation explicitly endorsing or rejecting America 's involvement in NATO 's Libyan intervention . The matter was never voted on by the full Senate . Deep congressional divisions over the mission stemmed in part from a belief among some representatives and senators on both sides of the aisle that Obama violated the War Powers Resolution . Passed in 1973 , the law gives a president 60 days to get congressional approval for sending U.S. forces to war , followed by a 30-day extension to end hostilities . While the combined 90-day period ended before hostilities concluded , White House officials insisted the mission -- backed by the United Nations -- did not violate the War Powers Act because it failed to meet the law 's definition of combat . Previous administrations also resisted the law 's restrictions . `` The ( Obama ) administration , which spent well over a billion dollars of taxpayer funds , dropped thousands of bombs on the country , and operated our military offshore for months , claimed that 'combat ' was not occurring , and rejected the notion that the War Powers Act applied to the situation , '' Webb recently said on the Senate floor . `` I am not here to debate the War Powers Act . ( But ) I am suggesting that other statutory language that covers these kinds of situations must be enacted . '' Webb 's proposal notwithstanding , a number of political analysts question the ultimate willingness of Congress to oppose any U.S. military action -- particularly in the post-9/11 era . `` These attempts by Congress to restrict the president 's authority as commander-in-chief are almost always symbolic , because presidents rarely enter conflicts without some expectation of public support , '' said Brown University political scientist Wendy Schiller . CNN polling showed a slight majority of Americans in favor of the Libyan intervention in the spring of 2011 , though public sentiment quickly turned against the conflict .
Legislation would require explicit congressional OK for military humanitarian missions . Sen. Webb , Obama , questioned U.S. 's commitment of forces in Libya 30-day . Congress was unable to explicitly endorse or reject Libya role in the NATO intervention . Political scientist : Congress 's efforts to restrict war powers `` are almost always symbolic ''