Jordan, Kaptur call for vote in Congress

House members want lawmakers to weigh in before Obama administration acts in Syria.
Tom Jackson
Sep 3, 2013


Erie County’s two U.S. House members — Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Urbana, and Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Toledo — both say they favor a vote in Congress before the Obama administration carries out a military strike in Syria.

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.


Darwin's choice

It's time for all members of Congress and the House to listen to the people....NO action in Syria, or, suffer the consequences.


"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."

"Commentators said it was the first time a British prime minister had lost a vote on war since 1782, when parliament effectively conceded American independence by voting against further fighting to crush the colony's rebellion."

This is what can happen if we all shout out to our government "NO"!!!!


I'm torn as to whether we should get involved, but do wonder if the conservative who are against our involvement in Syria were also against us going into Afghanistan and Iraq in the early 2000s?

I agree that we can tell our government "NO". This is essentially what Americans did in 2009, when we said enough to Bush/Cheney/McCain et al.


Re: "I'm torn as to whether we should get involved,"

How and why can you be "torn"?

Don't you support your Pres.?


Yea, I was against Pres. Carter meddling there back in 1979.

JudgeMeNot's picture

What Do We Tell Our Children? That the members of the Nobel Committee, weary of the warmongering Bush-era, so readily swallowed Obama's con job?

Obama and his disciples have one goal.

Peninsula Pundit

I really wonder why Marcy didn't sign the letter.
From what is posted of it, I didn't read anything that would prohibit her from signing on.


Marcy doesn't need to sign the a GOP-written letter, she merely needs to vote on the issue. We Democrats already HAVE solidarity within our own party, and don't need "contracts" to strongarm others within our own part.

One can certainly understand the appeal these have to a conservative party that is torn asunder and heading in two opposite directions.


Re: "don't need "contracts" to strongarm (sp) others within our own part (sp)."

"Contract" as in not bothering to write a federal budget?

So do you support your Pres. or not regarding U.S. military action in Syria?


Oh baloney. You know darn well that Obama has submitted a budget each and every year he has been in office. The GOP has fought its implementation, and this isn't news.

It's amazing how some Republicans are fact-challenged and history challenged, ignoring the recent history that we ALL lived through.
You're no better than the Louisianans who were recently polled about Hurricane Katrina: 29% blamed Obama for the lackluster government relief, while only 28% blamed Bush. The hurricane occurred in 2005, nearly four (4) years before Obama even took office, although in Contango's world, that's probably up for debate.


Re: "Oh baloney"

Would you like some bread with your lunch meat?

"Why Senate Democrats haven’t passed a budget"

"Katrina"? Reads like a bad case of ADHD ya got there Comrade.

Second request:

So do you support your Pres. or not regarding U.S. military action in Syria?

The Big Dog's back


JudgeMeNot's picture

Oh no, the big dopes back.


you must be a murder too! cause that is all these fn wars do! bomb for peace...are you out your ever mf mind!?!?


Re: "Yep!"

You support a new war? Join up putz.

Darwin's choice

So, how is the economy doing, Coasterfan? And how about the price of gasoline, remember throwing Bush under the bus for the short increase in pricing? Also, when are those shovel ready jobs getting started? Maybe those millions of unemployed can get hired! But the topper is the 48+ million on Government assistance, the most in any history, and that's all Obama's......You might want to stop patting yourself on the back for all those "green energy" failure' many billions are they totaling up to now?


"Israel says Med missile joint exercise with US":

The crazy (bleeping) CIA-led Sock Puppet wants the U.S. in a war.

Might temporarily distract from the pathetic economy.

Watch gold and oil go higher, then thank Pres. Obama.


So then you'll be thanking Obama when gold prices go up?


coaster getting owned again with facts.

JudgeMeNot's picture

Obama(Nobel peace prize winner) on October 2, 2002: "I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars."

Syria would be a dumb mistake. Unfortunately the PC dems are in the process of killing our great nation.

In 2008 Obama made the argument that the president doesn’t have the power to authorize a military attack without an imminent threat to the nation.
The Nobel Peace Prize has a been "salute a fool" prize for years. Jimmy is already saying Go Obama, Go.


I'm a little curious as to why anyone who opposed the actions in Iraq and Afghanistan would be in favor of this action. It apparently has to do with how people died.
Misogynistic, 6th century morals aren't a problem. Proven regional thugs (proven WMD user, proven nuclear weapon developer and proven terrorist financier) aren't a national interest.
OH! I get it! You're worried about other countries possibly being targeted with WMD by Syria. But I can believe that some of our leaders (Sec of State) were ignorant enough to be guests of this monster.
Let me think... who would be the most likely candidate of internationally deployed WMD ?.... The Italians!
Man, I love when my betters do the thinking for me....

JudgeMeNot's picture

It mind-boggling why anyone who opposed the actions in Iraq and Afghanistan would be in favor of this action.

Darwin's choice

Not to change the subject, but didn't Obama give federal workers a pay raise last friday? Raises??? Thought we were broke? What about this "sequester"?? What do you say Coasterfan? Big Dog? Just throwing this out there to remind of the BS you're backing. Bologna, huh?

Darwin's choice

Coasterfan, Big Dog, 4Shizzle, do you have any idea how many "wars" that Obama has going on right now??


More than any President in history!

Nobel Peace Prize winner.....riiight!

JudgeMeNot's picture

Obama should do the decent thing and return his peace prize.


I believe he was awarded that prize because they KNEW what he was going to do.... Not be Bush.... Trying to give us down trodden hope... ect.
Therefore the committee needs to decide whether they got their money's worth... If not, ask for it's back.

2cents's picture

Always two sides, not sure what our government wants to do? Go bomb the Syrian government for killing children or go bomb insurgents for killing children? What a cluster F, stay out!


just do not want to miss this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Darwin's choice

"Deriding President Barack Obama as the weakest president "in my adult lifetime," former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called on the White House on Tuesday to fish or cut bait in Syria."


Darwin's choice

"The Obama national security team that wants to go to war with Syria and demonizes President Bashar Assad is the same group that, as senators, urged reaching out to the dictator.

As a bloc on the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, President Obama, Secretary of State John F. Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Vice President Joseph R. Biden all opposed the George W. Bush administration’s playing tough with Mr. Assad"...

Well, what a bunch of flip-floppers we have here!




How the Rest of the World Views the American Military
Paul Waldman lays out a list of significant US military actions over the past 50 years, and it adds up to 15 separate episodes, ranging from full-scale wars (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan) to smaller incursions (Grenada, Haiti, Panama). For those of you who are math challenged, this means we've launched a significant overseas assault every 40 months since 1963. Waldman explains what this means:

Darwin's choice

8 questions we should have firm answers on before attacking Syria

1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?

2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?

3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?

4. Have all other nonviolent policy means been fully exhausted?

5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?

6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?

7. Is the action supported by the American people?

8. Do we have genuine broad international support?