Senate Democrats who initially expressed concerns about the expansion of the U.S. military mission in Iraq and Syria are now holding their breath ahead of the president’s speech Wednesday night.
Several Democrats over August recess called for President Obama to come to Congress for a vote to authorize military force against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), but on Tuesday said they would wait and see.
{mosads}Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) said two weeks ago the president could take immediate action against ISIS if he determined it posed an immediate threat, but said “a long-term, intense operation” would be “another issue.”
He also doubted if there would be enough “automatic, instantaneous, and reflexive” support in Congress for action in Syria.
However, on Tuesday the Rhode Island lawmaker said he’s “very interested, as is everyone else, to hear the president’s comments tomorrow evening,” in regards to whether there should be a congressional vote.
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), who warned against an open-ended military mission in Iraq on Aug. 8, said on Tuesday, “First I want to see what the president says.”
And Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said he would wait until after the president’s remarks to decide whether there should be a vote.
“Mission creep is always a worry, which is why an open-ended military commitment is an anthemia to me but let’s see what the president proposes Wednesday evening,” he said.
The hesitance comes as a new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows that Americans widely support airstrikes in Iraq and Syria, and as lawmakers concede that such an authorization vote likely wouldn’t take place before November elections.
Despite their newfound attitudes, the lawmakers did outline what they would not approve from the president or what could trigger calls for an authorization vote.
Cardin said Obama needs to come Congress if the U.S. is involved for “more than two months in a combat situation,” putting his personal red line in early October.
“I want to make sure we don’t see a revisit to the type of circumstances in 2001 where we thought we could go in, clean up things quickly and all of a sudden we’re there for over a decade,” he told The Hill.
Blumenthal vowed to oppose and prolonged military involvement, especially one that calls for U.S. ground troops.
“In my view, airstrikes that go beyond limited targets in terms of duration and scope and number, would require congressional approval – if there’s a prolonged air campaign congress should be involved,” he said.
So far, the only lawmakers who have introduced authorization legislation all support military action in Iraq and Syria — Sens. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.). They also believe the president already has the authority to act.
Only Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) stood by their previous calls for a vote over the recess, and issued new statements on Tuesday.
“I don’t believe he has the authority to go on offense,” Kaine said in a Senate floor Tuesday. “It is the job of Congress not the president to declare war.”
And Schiff said in a statement that “if the president intends to prolong the military campaign in Iraq or extend it into Syria, he needs to make the case directly to the American people and secure authorization from Congress.”
Anti-war democrats are preparing a press conference on Thursday, according to a House aide.