Senate acts on Detainee Rights and Iraq

I don't know if the recent criticism of Bush has emboldened the Iraqi insurgents, but it's emboldened some insurgents here at home, including the U.S. Senate, which has last decided to exercise it's authority even if it's contrary to the wishes of the President. The Senate already overwhelmingly passed the McCain amendment barring torture of detainees; now the Senate is acting to confirm the legal standing of detainees to challenge their detention:

"The compromise links legislation written by Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), which would deny detainees broad access to federal courts, with a new measure authored by Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) that would grant detainees the right to appeal the verdict of a military tribunal to a federal appeals court. The deal will come to a vote today, and the authors say they are confident it will pass."

As you'll recall, it was Senator Graham who authored the amendment that would deny habeus corpus to the detainees, thus eliminating their ability to appeal their detention to the federal courts. Normally I would disagree with their effort to strip away the habeus corpus petition, but in this case it seems that was hardly amounting to much of anything for the detainees anyway, as the government has consistently hemmed and hawed and fought not to disclose information that would allow the detainees to challenge their detention. In exchange the detainees are granted the right, under a provision authored by Senator Levin, to appeal any findings of a military tribunal to a federal court. To me, a guaranteed but more limited right is better then a broader right which doesn't amount to much more then a stack of paperwork. In addition, this amendment is also being linked with the McCain effort to ban torture of detainees held in U.S. facilities, making it essentially a detainee issue triple-shot being fired across the bow of the White House, indicating clearly that the Senate is reasserting itself against the White House even on issues that pertain to national security.

The Senate is also pressing for concrete steps on a draw-down in Iraq, as well as a requirement that the White House provide more information to military operations:

"By a vote of 79 to 19, the Senate approved a resolution designating 2006 as "a period of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty . . . thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq." It would also require the White House to submit to Congress an unclassified report every 90 days detailing U.S. policy and military operations."

This came about largely as a result of a Democratic amendment that would have required a plan on withdrawal in Iraq. That plan was rejected, but the impetus was in place for language that would require the White House to account to the Senate to some degree for operations in Iraq.

Of course the House Republican leadership, ever beholden to partisan interests and the White House, is resisting the implementation of these measures:

"'It's fair to say the White House has made the case -- both the president and the vice president -- that the McCain amendment is harmful,' acting House Majority Leader Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said last week."

And of course Cheney continues to lobby against the McCain amendment, and the White House argues against any restrictions on it's ability to conduct the "war on terror" or the war in Iraq. Nonetheless, the impetus for change, combined with the ever increasing criticism on both sides of the partisan divide of Bush and his conduct towards the war, indicates that the trend is now for less deference towards the White House in it's conduct towards national security.

Whatever your partisan affiliation is, this can be viewed as a heartening development. While I agree in general that the executive has the ultimate authority on the prosecution of a war, the attacks on 9/11 should never have been used as an excuse by the Bush administration to take full license to prosecute a campaign against terrorism and the war in Iraq with near impunity. The isolation of the decision-making process under that approach has gotten us where we are now. The involvement of the Senate in particular, and Congress in general, gives us hope that the administration will be more willing to make it's decisions in the light of day and with the best interests of the American people at heart.