President Barack Obama’s push to retaliate militarily against Syria took a major step forward Tuesday after securing a forceful endorsement from House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH). Boehner’s remarks in favor of intervening to punish the regime’s alleged use of chemical weapons dramatically alter the politics in Congress as it gears up for the debate.
“The use of chemical weapons is a barbarous act,” Boehner told reporters after meeting with the president and congressional leaders at the White House. “This is something that the United States as a country needs to do. I’m going to support the president’s call for action. I believe my colleague should support this call for action.”
“I appreciate the president reaching out to me and my colleagues in the Congress over the last couple of weeks. I also appreciate the president asking the Congress to support him in this action,” the Speaker said. His remarks were backed by his deputy, Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), who also announced his support for Obama’s mission shortly after the morning meeting at the White House.
Boehner’s support changes the politics because scores of lawmakers in both parties have remained skeptical of military intervention in Syria despite the Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of Damascus. Republicans, in particular, are deeply divided between the foreign policy hawks and a growing strain of isolationists within their tent. (Democrats are also split between war-weary progressives and humanitarian interventionists.)
This sets up a potentially nasty debate between GOP leaders and conservatives like Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI), who have been making the case against intervening. The debate will also test the instincts of 2016 presidential contenders like Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) to remain on the opposite side of Obama.
Boehner spokesman Michael Steel made clear that while Boehner supports Obama’s mission, it remains the President’s responsibility to make the case to Americans and members of Congress. “Everyone understands that it is an uphill battle to pass a resolution, and the Speaker expects the White House to provide answers to Members’ questions and take the lead on any whipping effort,” he said. “All votes authorizing the use of military force are conscience votes for members, and passage will require direct, continuous engagement from the White House.”
Boehner’s announcement was met with immediate pushback from some of the more conservative members of the GOP conference:
.@SpeakerBoehner @GOPLeader I just finished 2nd stop of 11 to listen to constituents on #Syria. Almost unanimous opposition to U.S. strikes.
— Justin Amash (@repjustinamash) September 3, 2013
Since #Obama still refuses to tell us the whole truth about #Benghazi, why do GOP leaders trust Obama to be truthful about #Syria? #TCOT
— Cong. Tim Huelskamp (@CongHuelskamp) September 3, 2013
The full-throated support from the Speaker was unusual. He has tended not to wade head-first into internal GOP debates, instead preferring to mediate and let his conference arrive at its own conclusion, which he would support. In this case, he and his No. 2 have stuck their necks out in a way that gives them ownership over the President’s mission. It’s now up to them to make sure GOP members don’t block Obama.
The White House has launched a full-court press to ensure that the resolution passes. Negotiations are underway in the Senate to revise the language of the draft resolution initially proposed by the White House. Agreement on more limited language could be reached as early as Tuesday evening. The administration is not pushing for regime change and opposes U.S. boots on the ground; it wants to launch targeted military strikes at Bashar al-Assad’s facilities in an effort to deter him and other dictators in the present and future from using chemical weapons.
Thanks to the GOP leaders’ support, ensuring congressional approval of the Syria mission is now Boehner’s problem just as much as it is Obama’s problem.
