As Ukraine Conflict Rages Congress Struggles To Legislate A Response

Instead, the talks collapsed. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) Told reporters the same day that President Biden had “all the power he needs” and the GOP withdrew from the talks and introduced its own bill on sanctions a week ago. later. The story goes on under the ad When Russian forces crossed the Ukrainian border on February 24, almost every American lawmaker condemned the invasion, but Congress as an institution took no immediate action to respond. In fact, five weeks later, Congress has not yet sent an independent bill to Biden to punish Russia or help Ukraine. Lawmakers approved a $ 13.6 billion military and humanitarian aid package last month, but that legislation – which was included in a huge federal spending bill – was the exception to the rule. Efforts to pass a resolution banning Russian oil imports have eroded trade preferences for Russia and Belarus, accusing Putin of being a war criminal and giving the federal government more tools to pursue Russian orthodoxy and oligarchs. . Not so much a symbolic resolution condemning the invasion has passed both houses of parliament, despite widespread bipartisan support for the Ukrainian cause and the long-distance appeal of President Volodymyr Zelensky. The reasons for legislative inaction are myriad, according to interviews with more than a dozen lawmakers, aides and observers. They begin with the daily challenges of getting things done on the Capitol, such as conflicts of selfishness, partisan politicization, and Senate rules that can work to complicate even simple matters. But they also include a long-term weakening of Congress’ once assertive role in foreign affairs and national security, and a consequent increase in political polarization around these issues. The story goes on under the ad While there is hope that the legislative conflict could break out next week, the raw events of the situation have surprised some longtime foreign policy recallers remembering a time when lawmakers and presidents worked hand in hand across party lines during international crises. “If not this, then what? “If you can not agree on legislation for something where there is so much unanimity, do you know when you can do it?” said Dan Dealer, a former aide to Richard Lugar, a longtime Indiana Republican senator who died in 2019 who is now the policy director at the Lugar Center, which focuses on global issues. Washington’s old adage that politics “stops at the water’s edge” has clearly faded since its heyday in the Cold War, Dealer added: “It is simpler for the opposition party to sit on the sidelines and criticize cable news or whatever. “they put their ideas on the line,” he said, “and the president’s party knows in this time of diminishing congressional power in national security policy that the president can go his own way, so he does not need to legislate.” The story goes on under the ad This dynamic has fully appeared in recent months at the Capitol. In short, congressional Democrats were reluctant to back Biden as he embarked on a strategy to form a global coalition led by a renewed NATO in response to the Russian invasion. Republicans, meanwhile, are determined to overtake Biden, calling his approach weak and reckless – with some clearly seeing the opportunity to create a political wedge in the run-up to the November midterm elections. McConnell, for example, has accused the Biden administration of encouraging Putin to leave Afghanistan and “pulling his fists” into Ukraine. Republican lawmakers have lined up to demand that Biden do more and faster, and the pressure campaign has played a clear role in shaping the government’s response. But this rhetoric has been undermined by GOP maneuvers both in the past and in the present. Republicans were largely reluctant to assess the impact of President Donald Trump’s skeptical relationship with NATO or his infamous ultimatum to Zelensky, threatening to withhold key defensive weapons unless he shared material and political resources. Biden, Hunter. More recently, dozens of Republicans voted against the bill, which included billions of dollars in aid to Ukraine, complaining that it was attached to a much broader bill that funded domestic opposition programs. For two weeks, Republican senators suspended the passage of a bill passed by parliament that would increase tariffs on goods from Russia and Belarus, while also re-authorizing and extending a federal law that would allow the government to sanctions on foreign officials involved in serious corruption or human rights violations. The story goes on under the ad This, together, fueled intense Democratic attacks on the Republican Party’s stance on the crisis in Ukraine and added to the growing pressure on Republican leaders to break the deadlock. “I think a lot of them really want to help Ukraine, but they are so used to opposing a Democratic president for everything and anything they can not figure out how to get out of their way,” said Sen. Chris Murphy. -Conn.). “There are moments of crisis where both sides have to stand behind the president of the United States. The Democrats did it afterwards [the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks]. “Republicans, in general, do not do that.” Sen. James E. Risch (Idaho), a leading Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in an interview that the impasse was “the nature of the beast, unfortunately” – referring to the ability of any senator to act quickly to block action. . “Other side issues, such as politics and people claiming positions and things like that,” he said, “sometimes hinder the goal.” The story goes on under the ad When the Commerce and Sanctions bill came to the Senate last month, he was immediately challenged by Sen. Mike Crapo, Idaho, a senior Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, who was concerned that the bill did not to ban Russian oil imports. The Senate Democrats agreed to calm Krapos by moving a separate oil bill. But then Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) Opposed the section on the human rights sanctions bill, arguing that the changes could make it much easier for a president to impose sanctions on a foreign leader who was simply unpopular. views on abortion, sexuality or other social issues. Lawmakers who created the new language insisted they would not do so, but Paul held his position and won an agreement to change the wording of the bill. With the text of the bill now reopened, more than half a dozen other senators appeared to seek other amendments. This has complicated any hopes of the bill passing the Senate, sending it back to Parliament and putting it in Biden’s office before a two-week break begins on Thursday. The story goes on under the ad “And all 100 senators have the right to say, ‘No, I’ll not do that until you address my issue,’” Krapo said Thursday. “And there are more than one or two issues here.” While it is largely the politicization of Republicans created by the current bloc, the democratic imperatives dictate exactly what kind of legislation is starting to move from the beginning. Trade and oil bans, for example, merely codify executive orders Biden has already implemented, and human rights elements – an extension of Magnitsky’s global human rights accountability – deal with sanctions. are applied and withdrawn exclusively by the President. More provocative legislation – such as a bipartisan resolution calling on Biden to supply NATO-controlled MiG-29 jets to Ukraine – was ignored by Democratic congressional leaders. This has frustrated Republicans who wanted to act much more aggressively, imposing sanctions on Russian officials and organizations that can not simply withdraw from the presidential torment. This lingering philosophical conflict sparked the collapse of the pre-invasion negotiations: Democrats would not accept Congress’ action binding Biden as he tries to deal with the crisis. The story goes on under the ad A bill on the “mother of all sanctions” introduced by the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Robert Menendez (DN.J.), aimed at decimating the Russian economy, was written to function as a Damocles sword, which will enter into force only if Russia chooses to invade Ukraine. Risch’s Democratic Party alternative – the Never Yielding Europe’s Territory, or NYET, Act – would have imposed immediate sanctions, including the effective cancellation of a key Russian-owned gas pipeline, on the grounds that a punch to the nose would be most effective deterrent to Putin. Eventually, no bill passed, and Biden acted in concert with the Allies after the Russian invasion to impose almost all the sanctions the lawmakers had envisioned. And for most Democrats, that’s okay. “We have moved at an incredible pace when needed,” said Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), citing $ 13.6 billion in aid. “But many of these other bills are about the legislature trying to get into foreign policy in ways that are superfluous to what the Biden government and the international community are already doing. “Many people want to show their leadership and one of the reasons these bills do not pass is that they are not really necessary for our response.” The story goes on under the ad Even smaller, more targeted accounts have struggled to gain traction. Resolution condemning alleged Russian war crimes in Ukraine and calling for …