Jordan was among 116 members of the U.S. House who signed a letter to the president arguing that the Constitution requires lawmakers to weigh in if there’s no immediate threat posed by Syria.
“If you deem that military action in Syria is necessary, Congress can reconvene at your request. We stand ready to come back into session, consider the facts before us, and share the burden of decisions made regarding U.S. involvement in the quickly escalating Syrian conflict,” says the letter circulated by Rep. Scott Rigell, R-Va.
Jordan’s office released a statement to the Sandusky Register, explaining why he signed the letter.
“While protecting the flexibility our leaders need to respond to threats to our sovereignty and our interests, Congress plays an important role in our national security, and the American people deserve to know what our mission in Syria would be, how it would be conducted, when it would be completed, what would constitute victory, and how all of it fits with our policy interests in the region,” Jordan stated.
Kaptur did not sign the Rigell letter, which was mostly signed by Republican lawmakers. But Kaptur agrees that lawmakers should be allowed to debate military action, and that’s long been her position, said her spokesman, Steve Fought.
“No question, Congresswoman Kaptur believes Congress should meet, debate and vote if the president wants to conduct military action. She has been consistent in that view throughout her career and this case is no different,” Fought said. Kaptur is on vacation this week and has been unavailable for interviews. Britain’s main body in Parliament, the House of Commons, voted on the issue Thursday and handed a setback to British Prime Minister David Cameron. By a 285 to 272 vote, the British lawmakers voted against carrying out a military strike on Syria in cooperation with the U.S. Cameron, who had favored a military strike, said afterward that he’ll respect the outcome.