Thursday, January 30, 2020
The War Powers Act of 1973 Essay Example for Free
The War Powers Act of 1973 Essay The fundamental conflict between Article I, Section 8 and Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution gave occasion to the passing of The War Powers Act of 1973 also known as The War Powers Resolution of 1973. The former constitutional provision granted the power to declare war to Congress while the latter appointed the President of the United States to be the Commander-in-Chief of the country’s armed forces. The conflict occurred because the Presidents, in sending American soldiers to war in their capacity as their Commander-in-Chief, have been ignoring the provision of the constitution which vested unto Congress the â€Å"sole power to declare war. †This practice was believed to have started when President Truman sent American soldiers to Korea without a congressional declaration of war. The truth was, the United States Congress had not officially declared any war after World War II (Lithwick). It was observed that the U. S. Presidents believed that as long as Congress did not declare any war formally, committing American soldiers to hostilities was within their constitutional power as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. In other words, so long as Congress could be prevented from declaring war formally, the presidents retain a virtual free hand in such cases (Centre for European Policy Studies).                  After the war in Vietnam, however, the members of Congress, in an effort to assert their authority to declare war which was granted by the constitution, passed The War Powers Act of 1973 over the veto which was exercised by then President Richard Nixon. Unfortunately, the act failed to settle with finality the conflict between the President and Congress. As a matter of fact, almost all American Presidents continued to ignore Congress, including The War Powers Act of 1973, for various reasons (Rasky).            The Act has three prominent sections. These are Sections 3 (which deals on â€Å"Consultation†); Section 4 (Reporting); and Section 5, which discusses â€Å"Congressional Action.†Section 3 specifically states that The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situation where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations (War Powers Resolution of 1973).            This provision clearly asserts the constitutional authority of Congress in the declaration of war or the commitment of American soldiers to any war or war-like activities. In other words, Congress do not only want to be consulted before the President sends any troops to hostile situations, but it should also be appraised of the situation while the troops are still in the area. Finally, the President should consult with Congress when the troops will already be withdrawn or have already been withdrawn.            Section 4, on the other hand, states that when American forces are deployed in hostilities without a war being declared, a written report should be submitted by the President within 48 hours of such deployment to both the Speaker of the House of Representatives as well as the President pro tempore of the U.S. Senate. The report should explain the reasons for the action and the â€Å"estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement.†Aside from submitting this written report at least once every six months, the President should also answer any questions posed by Congress concerning its constitutional war-making powers (War Powers Resolution of 1973).            These provisions, unfortunately, had been cited as not only burdensome and dilatory, but also unfair, particularly Section 3, when Congress is in recess. For instance, President Gerald Ford experienced some difficulties along this line when American forces were being evacuated from DaNang sometime in 1975 and again in 1976 in Lebanon. He said that â€Å"When the evacuation of DaNang was forced upon us during the Congress’s Easter recess, not one of the key bipartisan leaders of the Congress was in Washington.†He said that because of the break, some of the key leaders were in Greece. Others were in the People’s Republic of China, while there were those who spent the time in Mexico, the Middle East, and Europe. He expressed disappointment with the law, calling it unfair especially since, according to him, â€Å"military operations seldom wait for Congress to meet,†claiming further that many critical situations around the world in fact arose when it was nighttime in Washington (HOW AMERICA GOES TO WAR). In essence, President Ford was explaining that preparing for and/or actually going to war could be greatly hampered by all these consultations and reporting to Congress because any element of surprise or advantage of quick retaliation would be lost in the process.            Republican President Ronald Reagan had similarly experienced the dilatory effect of the War Powers Act in 1982. After deploying American Marines to Lebanon, President Reagan complied with the provision of the act by making a report about the deployment to Congress. In spite of the majority of the Republicans in the Senate, the deployment was vigorously opposed by the Democratic congressmen who were the majority in the House of Representatives at the time. In other words, the deployment was not granted Congressional authority for several months, only to be approved later the following year after a compromise was reached by the leaders of both houses of Congress, authorizing the U.S. Marines to stay in Lebanon for 18 months. What made matters worse was the observation of some quarters that the opposition to the deployment had been mainly due to partisan political reasons. President Reagan, for his part, was greatly disappointed with the compromise especially since it sought President Reagan’s assurances on what the Marines were not supposed to do, thereby tying down their hands and reducing their effectiveness (HOW AMERICA GOES TO WAR). According to observers, the delay in the authorization and the challenges made in the House of Representatives had the effect of weakening the negotiating position of President Reagan not only with Syria but also with the warring political groups found in Lebanon. As a result, the Department of State’s Director of the Policy Planning Staff, Peter W. Rodman, said that the presence of the Marines in Lebanon was stripped of its deterrent impact. Specifically, Rodman explained that what happened in Congress â€Å"convinced the Syrians that the United States was ‘short of breath’ †¦, thus undermining the delicate diplomatic efforts †¦that sought a negotiated solution†By March 6, 1984, Senator Howard Baker, the Majority Leader, was already questioning the appropriateness and the relevance of the War Powers Act as an interactive tool between the two branches of government. He voiced the opinion that the country’s military involvement in other countries could not always start off â€Å"with a prolonged tedious and divisive negotiation between the executive and the legislative branches of Government [because] The world and its many challenges to [American] interests simply do not allow [such] luxury† (HOW AMERICA GOES TO WAR). Records would later show that that Lebanese episode was the first and only incident where Congress was able to invoke the War Powers Act. Nevertheless, a compromise subsequently produced the required congressional authority and effectively aborted what could have been a genuine face-off between the two branches of government (Rasky).            Section 5, which provides for the necessary congressional action, is the third important section of the Act. Subsection (a) of this section provides that when Congress is not in session for at least three days when the President’s report is being transmitted to Congress, the President could be requested jointly by the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representative to convene Congress for the sole purpose of considering the report and taking any appropriate action where necessary. Obviously, this provision should be interpreted as proof of Congress’s intention of giving due priority to the problem. Subsection (b), on the other hand, requires the President to withdraw the American forces from the area of hostilities sixty days from the filing of the report to Congress unless: Congress has either officially declared war or has issued its authorization for the continued use of the American forces; has granted a statutory extension after the sixty-day period has lapsed; or fails to convene for the purpose of acting on the matter resulting from any armed attack from hostile parties. This section likewise specifies that in a case where an extension to the sixty-day period is requested by the President for any valid reason, Congress is only empowered to grant an additional 30 days to effect the safe withdrawal of the American forces. Finally, subsection (c) specifically provides that â€Å"at any time that United States Armed Forces are engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States, its possessions and territories without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be removed by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution†(War Powers Resolution of 1973).            According to this subsection, a concurrent resolution by the House of Representatives and the Senate could compel the President to immediately withdraw American forces from undeclared wars. This, however, has been deemed unconstitutional by some quarters, interpreting the provision as giving â€Å"the force of law to a concurrent resolution, which is passed by majorities in both chambers of Congress, but is not presented to the President for his consent or veto.†They have cited Article I, Section 7, Clause 3 of the Constitution which provides that Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two-thirds vote of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the case of a Bill (HOW AMERICA GOES TO WAR). Works Cited Lithwick, Dahlia. â€Å"What War Powers Does the President Have?†15 January 2008.            http://www.slate.com/id/1008290 Centre For European Policy Studies. â€Å"On a European War Powers Act.†19 February 2007.            15 January 2008. http://ceps01.link.be/Article.php?=article_id=80 â€Å"HOW AMERICA GOES TO WAR.†The Progressive Conservative. Ed. Alman Leroy Way,            Jr. 10 June – 31 December 1999. 15 January 2008.            http://www.geocities.com/way_leroy/ProConVolTwoIssueOnePage5.html Rasky, Susan F. â€Å"War Powers Act: Years of Conflict Over Constitutionality.†New York            Times online. 19 April 1988. 15 January 2008.            http://ceps01.link.be/Article.php?=article_id=80 â€Å"War Powers Resolution of 1973.†Almanac of Policy Issues. 7 November 1973. 15 January http://www.policyalmanac.org/world/archive/war_powers_resolution.shtml
Wednesday, January 22, 2020
Physics of Swimming Essay -- physics swim swimming
The study of physics and fluid dynamics in swimming has been a field of increasing interest for study in the past few decades among swimming coaches and enthusiasts. Despite the long history of research, the understanding of how to move the human body effectively through the water is still in its infancy. Competitive swimmers and their coaches of all levels are constantly striving for ways to improve their stroke technique and overall performance. The research and performances of today's swimmers are continuously disproving the beliefs of the past. Like in all sports, a better understanding of physics is enabling the world class swimmers to accomplish times never before thought possible. This was displayed on the grandest of scales in the 2000 Olympics when Ian Thorpe, Inge De Bruijn, Pieter Van Den Hoogenband and a number of other swimmers broke a total of twelve world records and numerous Olympic and national records. Several forces play significant roles in the movement of the human body through the water. The forces are drag, lift, gravity and buoyancy. Lift and drag are the main propulsive forces that are used by swimmers. Resistance, known as drag, can be broken into three main categories: frontal resistance, skin friction, and eddy resistance. The effect of buoyancy in swimming is best described by Archimedes’ principle: a body fully or partially submerged in a fluid is buoyed up by a force equal to the weight of the fluid that is displaced by the body.1 This effectively negates any effects that gravity might have on a swimmer. The rare exception to this is a swimmer with very little body fat, and this is overcome by keeping the lungs inflated to a certain degree at all times. Frontal... ...s, but through her intense regiment of endurance training she was recently able to win two Olympic gold medals. A select few swimmers go beyond momentum and energy and use power to its fullest and have no competition, like Ian Thorpe or the once great Alex Popov. Works Cited 1 David Halliday, Robert Resnick, and Jearl Walker, Fundamentals of Physics, Extended, 5th ed. (NewYork:Wiley, 1997) 361 2 Cecil M. Colwin, Swimming Into the 21st Century, (Champaign: Human Kinetics, 1992) 20-32, 58-59 3 James E. Counsilman and Brian E. Counsilman, The New Science of Swimming, (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1994) 6-7 4 James E. Counsilman and Brian E. Counsilman, The New Science of Swimming, (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1994) 10-22 5 Robert E. Schleihauf, "A biomechanical analysis of freestyle." Swimming Technique, 1974, 11(3), 89-96
Tuesday, January 14, 2020
Women Role in Athenian Society
Women†s role in Greece can be seen when one first begins to do research on the subject. The subject of women in Greece is coupled with the subject of slaves. This is the earliest classification of women in Greek society. Although women were treated differently from city to city the basic premise of that treatment never changed. Women were only useful for establishing a bloodline that could carry on the family name and give the proper last rites to the husband. However, women did form life long bonds with their husbands and found love in arranged marriages. Women are â€Å"defined as near slaves, or as perpetual minors†in Athenian society (The Greek World, pg. 200). For women life didn†t extend far from the home, which was thought to be their sole realm of existence. Though they ranked higher than slaves did, they were treated in many of the same ways. Just like slaves, their mothers trained women as adolescents what their domestic duties were. They were secluded from all males, including those in their family. They lived in gynaikeion, which were women†s apartments in Athens (Daily Life in Greece, pg. 55). They were kept at home where they were taught the proper manners and duties of a desirable wife. â€Å"Marriage was the inevitable goal to which her whole life tended. To remain a spinster was the worst disgrace which could befall a woman†(Everyday Life in Ancient Greece, pg. 82). However, it was seen as more of a disgrace on her father who ‘owned†her until she was married. Although Athenian women were completely in charge of their household and slaves, they didn†t have much freedom. They rarely left the house, unless they were part of some sort of religious procession. They could only walk abroad in the streets if accompanied by a slave or other attendant. It was improper for respectable women to share the same social entertainments as men. Even if caught in the courtyard of the house by a male visitor, they would return to the seclusion of their own apartments. Pericles once said, â€Å"it was their business to be spoken of as little as possible whether for good or ill†(Everyday Life in Ancient Greece, pg. 82). This sentiment describes the extent of the importance of women in society. Marriage was their only major role in the lives of men. The betrothal was arranged by the parents as a strictly business contract. The parent†s choice of a suitable groom for their bride was a matter of pride and status for the family. The groom†s choice in bride was largely determined by the amount of dowry the bride would bring with her. Although the wedding was a happy ceremony, it was only the beginning of a woman†s loss of independence. Not only did women possess no independent status in the eyes of the law; she always remained under the supervision of a male. If her husband died, she was returned to her father†s or brother†s home where they would take charge of her. After the wedding, the wife†s duties were centered on the management of the home. She would overlook the slaves, mend and make clothing for her family, usually done by spinning or knitting, weave rugs and baskets for the home, or just fold and refold the clothing kept in the family chest. The wife was also responsible for maintaining her attractiveness for her husband. A proper Athenian wife would adorn herself with jewelry and use rouge upon her husband†s arrival home. Sometimes she might spend an entire evening sitting next to the couch where her husband lay reclining. Most importantly the Athenian women were seen as â€Å"fine upstanding matrons†fit to bear a race of excellent athletes†(Everyday Life in Ancient Greece, pg. 86). An Athenian man married primarily to have children. These children were expected to care for him in his old age, but more importantly to bury him with the â€Å"full appropriate rites†(Daily Life in Greece, pg. 57). Moreover, Athenian men married to have male children in order to perpetuate the family line and guarantee him honors when he died. It was also a large disgrace for a man to be unmarried. Basically, Athenians married not out of love for each other, but for religious and social convenience. All this aside, love was abundant in Greek society. Although love was never a determining factor in marriages, a lifelong bond and devotion developed between a couple as the years passed. â€Å"We know that the Greeks of the fifth and fourth century used the word eros (love) to describe the passion linking a husband and his wife†(Daily Life in Greece, pg. 58). There are many instances in myth and history where husbands and wives in Greek society have sacrificed themselves for the sake of the other. They were bonded together by their love of their family and by their dedication to each other through their family. Women were dedicated to the happiness of their husband and the well being of their children. Men were dedicated to providing for and supporting their family and raising noteworthy children. These common goals brought together the husband and wife like never before. It was this bond that sparked the beginning of a lifelong commitment to one another and the growth of th eir love for one another. Although women were not given formal rights, they were able to find pride and happiness in the mundane applications of their life. Women found pride in their children and satisfaction in their husband†s happiness. I would like to leave you with closing remarks that illustrate the bond between a wife and her husband. â€Å"The greatest pleasure to me will be this, that, if you prove yourself my superior, you will make me your servant and there will be no fear lest with advancing years your influence will wane; nay the better companion you are to me and the better guardian of the house to our children, the greater will be the esteem in which you are held at home; and all will admire you, not so much for your good looks as for your good deeds in practical life†(Everyday Life in Ancient Greece, pg. 86). â€Å"Atthis, who didst live for me and breathe thy last toward me, once the source of all my joy and now of tears, holy, much lamented, how sleepst thou the mournful sleep, thou whose head was never laid away from thy husband†s breast, leaving Theios alone as one who is no more; for with thee the hope of our life went to darkness†(Everyday Life in Ancient Greece, pg. 87).
Sunday, January 5, 2020
Baldcypress, an Excellent Tree Choice for Planting
Testimony after testimony from urban foresters and park administrators support the up and coming bald cypress or Taxodium distichum as the latest trend in selecting the best landscaping tree for many locations. Lawns, parks and street right-of-ways are growing baldcypress in profusion. Common baldcypress is an evergreen but acts deciduous as it drops its twiggy leaves in the fall. You can call it a deciduous conifer. The rich green color of the needles turn to copper orange then to brown and makes for one of autumns best colors just before twig and needle fall. Careful When Wet In wet soil conditions, the bald cypress will form sections of root growing above ground to gather oxygen. These knobby cypress knees can occur 10 to 15 beyond the spread of the plant. Cypress knees do not generally form on drier sites. On the Street Cities from Charlotte, NC, Dallas, TX to Tampa, FL currently use it as a street tree and it should be used more extensively throughout its range in urban landscapes according to most landscape professionals. Baldcypress can be clipped into a formal hedge, creating a wonderful soft screen or hedge. Art Plotnik, The Uban Tree Book, says as a street tree, the baldcypress is getting rave recommendations and increasing use. Tree professionals of New Orleans, Charlotte, Tampa and Dallas are among others that put it on the streets. Ralph Sievert, Minneapolis MN Urban Forester who is respected as the â€Å"Johnny Appleseed†of baldcypress, recommends it highly in his state and outside of the southern United States. Growth Bald cypress trees grow best when they have their own space and can potentially grow up to 2 feet per year. Bald cypress require sun (at least 1/2 day). They make a great screen when planted in groups and can be planted within 15 feet of a house.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)