WASHINGTON — Fearful of Saddam Hussein and his dangerous weaponry, a somber House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly Thursday to allow President Bush to embark on war if Iraq fails to abandon its biological, chemical and nuclear arms programs.
The Senate was expected to follow with a similarly strong vote authorizing Bush to unilaterally launch a pre-emptive strike.
Despite passions running high on both sides and quarrels over whether the United States must work more closely with the United Nations, the outcome of Thursday’s vote was not in doubt. The large margin, 296-133 in the House, is expected to bolster Secretary of State Colin Powell as he works to persuade the U.N. Security Council to demand a new round of unfettered weapons inspections in Iraq.
The resolution, the result of a bipartisan compromise brokered by House Democratic Leader Richard Gephardt, gives the president most of the power he sought. But the resolution also calls on the president to exhaust all diplomatic efforts before using force, and it narrows Bush’s focus to Iraq, rather than the whole Middle East as the White House initially proposed.
Finally, the measure requires the president to report to Congress every 60 days if he does go to war.
Thursday’s action comes 11 years after Congress first decided to take on the Iraqi president for his invasion of Kuwait in August 1990. Back then, the atmosphere was markedly different.
Congress had not directly confronted the prospect of sending American soldiers into combat since World War II. Lawmakers were anguished over the responsibility and conflicted about whether to give diplomacy more time or to turn to military force. This time, the debate over the Iraqi dictator was colored by the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, fear that Hussein could develop nuclear weapons to be used against the United States, and the looming midterm election.
Even Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, who had spent weeks voicing grave concerns about the president’s handling of Iraq, voted to give him the authority to use force.
Many lawmakers insisted that the resolution did not mean that the nation would soon be at war. Indeed, Bush has said he has not yet decided whether to activate the military.
“It is not an act of war. It is an act to deter war,” said Sen. John Warner, R-Va.
But other lawmakers said that Congress was making a monumental mistake.
Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., said Congress was repeating history by not asking enough questions and not taking enough time before granting a president’s request. Thirty-eight years ago, Byrd said, he voted for the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, which gave President Lyndon Johnson a free hand to expand the war in Vietnam.
“It was this resolution that led to the deaths of 58,000 Americans and 150,000 Americans being wounded in action,” Byrd said. “After all of that carnage, we began to learn that in voting for the Tonkin Gulf resolution, we were basing our votes on bad information.”