examine the defense department budget that deals with counterterrorism operations. >> good morning, it is monday, september 15, 2014. the house are scheduled to be in session today. one of the few before congress adjourned ahead of the miller -- midterm elections. isisslamic militant group will continue to be a major topic. with military efforts expected to expand, we are asking our viewers whether congress should go further and hold a specific vote on whether to authorize the strikes in syria and iraq

against isis. important toit is hold your member of congress on the record? should take place before the midterm elections. give us a call, democrats can call at (202) 737-0001. republicans at (202) 737-0002. independence (202) 628-0205. if you're outside the u.s., the number is (202) 628-0184. us on all your favorite social media pages. a good monday morning to you, the subject of whether congress should authorize this use of force against isis. new articles in today's papers from over the weekend. here is examples of a few of them. usa today, war vote stresses both parties.

in election year, senate democrats and house gop would rather punch. hill newspaper. liberals press pelosi, obama for vote on syrian airstrikes. don't duck an islamic state vote, congress. globe, let boston congress authorize war against isis. he says, before he goes to war, barak obama should go to congress. i want to turn to lauren french a congressional reporter with politico. with congressing this week? is there a vote scheduled? guest: that is really still being worked out.

language circulated showing lawmakers were ready to transfer equipment to these rebels, these moderate rebels that obama has identified, but they are still working through some of the details or plans and whether or not it can be attached to the resolution. there is a lot of desire to to show those two votes whether the u.s. is serious about those actions against isil. they want to take this serious. which chamber would take this up first and is there a enough time before congress is set to adjourn? guest: that is the big question about timing. there are five days left. kevin mccarthy had lawmakers come back in early today. they worked landing on being in session on monday today. it was going to be a four-day week. the house is going first and

the senate following closely behind. close timetable. not because it takes congress long to do anything, but because there are rules. even if they are moving as quickly as possible it could take days. there is a tight deadline that everyone should be watching to see whether they can pass something before friday are whether they might have to come in next week. want to show some headlines and opinion pieces already on the idea of a separate vote and authorizing of military strikes, a new vote on that. what is the talk among members of congress on when and if that would happen? guest: i'm sorry you cut out there, so i only heard the first part. host: the authorization of use of force. is there any schedule on when that vote might take place? big talksolutely, the

is if they do vote on arming those moderate syrian rebels, that the focus would be on military force that would likely happen after the election. we are talking lame duck. which will make for a boring lame duck session. ,uite busy, quite exciting quite heated. that gives the obama the ability to amp up this military conflict. there is no way this will happen before the election. lawmakers don't want to take that tough vote beforehand. before everyone is set to leave for campaign season. that would be a lame duck action. on capitol hill, what will we see from members of the obama administration coming up to answer questions? guest: there are a set of briefings already scheduled area there will be more of those and to personn

communication. you saw obama and kerry really hitting it and calling republicans and calling democrats to push this forward. you can bet those conversations will continue and a lot of pressure to finish by friday. host: outside of this debate, what are the other must do accurate items that congress has to do before leaving to campaign? that is the continuing resolution. if that doesn't get past we are on the brink of another government shutdown. there are lingering questions about the reauthorization of the x m. democrats are angry that there is only a temporary extension. they see that is a move to eventually kill the bank's authorization and get rid of it. there is a lot of debate

happening among the democratic caucus about what to do there. republicans aren't thrilled with any authorization of that bank come up so that might key up the continuing resolution. big thing thatt everyone needs to get finished before they go home. host: we will keep watching those must-view items. lauren french thank you for your time this morning. guest: any time. we'll ask our viewers if congress should authorize the use of force against isis. justification the obama administration is currently using. obama uses for statute he once pilloried. the administration announced that president bush's use of the military force resolution from 2001 is all the authority that mr. obama needs in this current effort.

that is causing some reaction from current members of congress but former members of congress. former senator robert bennett, a republican, says where i disagreed with republican is on his authority to do this all by himself and his constitutional role as commander in chief. canoubt that the president make a legal case but that is beside the point during when a commander in chief opposes to engage in acts of war that are not part of a short-term emergency but are amendments that stretch over an indefinite. of time, he should ask for formal congressional approval even if the letter of the lot does not require it. it is the spirit of the law, arising from the constitutional powers of congress, they shall have the power to declare war. simple consultation with legislative leaders is not enough. we'll start on the phones with our line for democrats. good morning.

go ahead. think theybsolutely should, like president obama wanted, authority from congress. but i highly doubt that they will. since the party of obama lost 2010,ides of the house in the republicans have done nothing to help them with anything. so to come back a few years later and blame obama for everything that he is not successful. ago,ber, only a few years the american soldiers were being killed by the terrorist groups in the middle east and president obama managed to get them back with some degree of self-respect for the u.s.. of those people say, go back to were -- war.

president obama is a good thinker, a slow but careful thinker and i always respect his opinion. from gainesville, virginia. a little bit more from that peace.bennett he writes, president obama will undermine his own efforts if he moves ahead on his own here. that will put even greater pressure on him to succeed and politically divide the country even more than it is now. he will build more support for his actions if he follows the examples of his two immediate right assessors and seeks congressional authorization for his actions, even if the letter of the law says he doesn't need it. we are asking your opinion if the president should seek congressional approval for his actions in military strikes. victor, good morning. i think president obama is right to go to congress and ask them for a declaration of war. he also has to ask them if they

fightow create money to the war. we are in debt 17.6 trillion dollars. is admiral says that greater threat to america than any terrorist group. and how are we going to pay for it? war, we were told it would be paid by iraq he oil money which never happened. the national debt went from 5.8 trillion to 11.5 trillion in the bush years. debtn't afford much more and we need to know how this will be paid for and what are the limitations -- host:reresident hasn't askedy -- actually congress for the declaration. do you think he should? does it matter if congress is on the record? isler: i would hope congress on the record before the election so we know where he

stands. we haven't declared war since world war ii. our independent line, vincent is calling from tacoma, washington. caller: thank you for taking my call. if you look at the opinion of the national newspapers around the country, the opinion pages. president obama requests anything from congress, the opinion pages are trying to take the negative aspect of whatever the request is. the opinion pages are suggesting that simply because he decided that he has the right as president to protect this ,ountry from any foreign danger whether congress approve or not,

from their perspective that is the negative perspective. the request should be made because anytime you want to take something this serious, you should have all of the support of all of the various government agencies supporting the president. time he sends people to war. host: is that something that should happen before the election or does it matter? caller: i think it does matter. i would like for signs from washington what my representative will be supporting the president even though it may be difficult for them because most of them are in getting in any prolonged engagement in a war. , i think i would

like to know if they are going to support the president. of whethere timing that vote might happen. another opinion piece from the "washington post." the column noting that voters have a right to expect congress to make a stand on something this serious. but a postelection vote accepts is. all attacks is what it we can sermonize that politicians should always vote their consciences and never, ever think about their own fates or the fate of their party. but to say this is to demand a degree of selflessness from men and women in political trade that we never ask of anyone else. with the exception of our soldiers and combat. maketelection debate would it easier for republicans and support the president's policy to say why and for democrats to oppose it to ask the difficult

questions his approach invites. both sides could more frankly weigh the costs involved against other priorities. whenrms of whether -- congress might take action, it was a subject that came up on our "newsmakers," program yesterday. [video clip] >> i think that will be the first thing that we consider. authorizing the president under our consent to equip and train in an overt way as opposed to covert way, people to take on isil. priority and other assets but boots on the ground will be the boots on the ground that live in the neighborhood who have a vested interest. now that we have in iraq he government-- iraqi

that is working to protect both sunni and shiite interests and that they will be in this partnership to confront isil, eight criminal terrorist element in their mix, we will proceed on that. backdly, when we come after the elections, i think there will be a consideration of a larger authorization for the use of force. we passed the amendment through the house of representatives before this immediate crisis confronted us and said that we ought to reconsider and reaffirm or change and modify or withdraw the use of force authorization that was passed in 2001. whip on ourminority newsmakers program you can check it out on www.c-span.org.

we are asking our viewers this morning should congress authorized the use of force against isis? when should that vote take place? morning.ood thank you for taking my call. thesolutely think that congressional vote should be before the election, that is the only way that we as the people can determine political influence on the process. in manytside our hands ways. the only way the people we put --office can needs to be put to vote. the other issue is that arming syrian rebels, should also be put to vote. that is a separate issue. upse arms are going to end in people that we do not want their arms -- they are against

our interests, they are for our allies in syria and saudi arabia, but they are against american interests. host: mark in fredericksburg, virginia to comment on the twitter page. not only should congress vote, but the vote should be to declare or not declare war. asking, with authorization will there be oversight from congress -- congress? our first segments from today's show we go to gary in highland, maryland. i am a political junkie, i have been following politics closely since 1948 and i remember the do-nothing congress

that harry truman ran against in 1948 and this congress is worse. it is time for these guys to step up and take charge and do their job. if they can't do that, vote them all out. everyone of them out during thank you. host: gary in highland, maryland. we will be showing you comments from members of congress. here is the veteran member of the house judiciary committee in a statement he put out on friday. he says, the constitution is clear, if not for an attack on the united states or an imminent threat to the country, any decision to use military force can only be made by congress, not the president alone. of planned expansion military operations against iso-that president obama announced earlier this week really constitute acts of war within the meaning of the

constitution. the constitution very deliberately places the decision to go to war with the american people. acting to congress, not with the president. consider is no obviously imminent threat to the united states, there is no legal justification for bypassing the constitutionally required congressional authorization. the possibility or likelihood of a real threat to the country is precisely among the matters that congress must consider. show "facen sunday's the nation," a republican, here is what he had to say. [video clip] is important. the president has said he was to come to congress. i think we are going to vote unlimited authorization with respect to training and vetting these syrian forces. i think it is important for congress to authorize these airstrikes into syria.

the general came out and said you can't win in less you go into syria. quickly by then administration. but he was right. we can't cut the head of the snake off and less we go to where it is. the head of the snake is in syria. host: the opinions of a few congressional leaders out there. we want to hear from you this morning. our phone numbers are on the screen. on our line from republicans from little rock, arkansas. caller: i'm with everybody that we should vote on everything we have a chance to vote on, but everybody is taking their ball and taking their eye off iran. extensionve iran the to give an answer, but as everything goes by they get a more foothold in iraq during when they do take the vote, there should be something there -- depending on whether iran decides on nuclear weapons,

whether we involve them in this or not, they are about to get in -- out of hand again. onn iran can make its move israel and isis will have its job done already. i've heard callers talk about the do-nothing congress and everyone is against the president, right now we know that harry reid has over 340 bills in the senate that he has refused to vote on. let me give a different picture. host: also on the republican line, robert from petros, tennessee. caller: thank you for taking my call. this administration is incompetent. they don't know what they are doing, they have no idea. the new government in iraq was formed and they reach out to us?

no they reached out to iran. that they sonment bravely put so much confidence another is just instance where this administration is not willing to ite on the fight and make look bad like they're going back into iraq. president obama said he would get us out of there, now look what has happened. air forcents to use and bomb these guys. we need boots on the ground to kill these people, put them in the ground and go to heaven with their 72 virgins and get rid of them. host: news in most of the paper today, the u.s. effort to form a coalition to help fight isis, noting,t page lead international support for the u.s. military campaign gathered strength. with the united game -- united

kingdom vowing to destroy the group. australia pledging its forces. the story notes that leading middle east countries are joining the u.s. in conducting airstrikes in military -- in syria and iraq. more on that story and several of the papers today. we want as many of your calls as we can. should congress authorized the use of force against isis? if you think so, when should that vote happen? before or after the election? no a in stafford, virginia. caller: good morning, sir. i would just like to make a comment on the president and his ability to go ahead and bomb isis. wait,k that the longer we

the more they are digging in and spreading out, if it doesn't stop them now, been waiting on anythingto authorize doesn't make sense to me. don't you think the president needs the ability to move as quickly as possible? caller: yes i do. i am ex military. arena, vietnam. -- marine, vietnam era. he needs to do what he said he is going to do instead of sitting around talking about. something thats goes for months or years, is there some point the president should come to congress or he continues to use that freedom? caller: i think he can take and use his freedom to act on his own. it would be good if congress would authorize it, but why keep

sitting around talking about it. they are over there killing people and they are getting bigger every day. do something now. host: james is in shelton, connecticut on our line for independents. [indiscernible] paul in fitzgerald on our line for democrats. i've been up all night. i live in a moldy rental house in georgia but i'm taking my medicine. upstairs i a copy of the constitution. i read it long before this started and there is a part in over andt he must take do his duties as a president,

but i cannot remember what the circumstances, you know, are to be for that to happen. so look in the constitution, it is right there. things to me have to be elemental. i am 72. remindto constantly myself and pullback from my own imagination. these problems are not -- and there is a pattern going on -- and a good one to think about is that president truman was at a little place after he came out of the presidency, signing books or something, and somebody asked him, why did you drop the atom bomb on the japanese? , didn'td at that man hesitate, and said i was doing the best i could at the time. you can best believe that is a loaded statement. he knew something that the general public doesn't know and

he was the man on the spot to do that. the president now might be the same kind of person. that theysome causes know -- that the big boy upstairs would approve. host: you bring up the constitution, a topic brought up by angus king in that column we showed earlier. he quotes angus king and his piece. congress does have a responsibility to weigh in when it comes to military forces. the senator noting that though the constitution makes the president the commander-in-chief, it vests responsibility for declaring war with congress. for that reason, it's important not to give the president carte blanche, but rather to congress be reasonably specific about the action it is authorizing. we go to milton, waiting on our

line for democrats. caller: i think that the president has to have approval from congress. i agree that before there was added to aa 5% tax war powers act, every time he is in a situation like this, he can do that if he thinks he should do it. that was never approved by congress but we should go back and look at that. keep takingt to your calls. 15 minutes left in this segment of the washington journal and we will continue to talk about u.s. efforts in the second half of today's show as well. a few headlines from around the country. post, to this washington clinton focuses iowa wins on midterm. in her clinton's trip

annual fundraising speak fry in iowa. a place known where presidential candidates and -- go to test the waters for their campaign. former secretary of state hillary clinton try to focus the attendees there on the midterms. here is a bit of what hillary clinton had to say when it came to if she would run in 2016. [video clip] >> then of course, that other thing. well, it is true i am thinking about it. but, for today, that is not why i am here. the steak.or host: that was hillary clinton

yesterday. in theign affairs news, papers today, another story from the washington post. north korea sentences and american men to six years hard labor. he sentenced to hard labor six years for hostile acts during usingts say that they're miller and to others as bargaining chips over their nuclear program. the story notes that the united states is preoccupied with the turmoil in the middle east where it is battling islamic state stream s. that is in "the washington post." what your calls if we can. should congress authorize the use of force against isis? caller: good morning. yes that we should get

with this involved process, but i have a proposal. my proposal would be that the convicted felons in america be allowed to go over there to help fight to get their rights back. i know that sounds kind of strange or far-fetched, but there are a lot of people who are convicted felons who are patriots and love this country that are not able to fight based on the fact that they have a felony. that on twitter, a report demand. -- potus must congressional debate and vote on war with isis before november midterm elections. cliff in tulsa, oklahoma. what do you think? caller: i think we should authorize the use, but i don't want to see someone get $350

million to not shoot at us again. if congress is involved maybe that won't happen again, from the past history of war, you shouldn't be paying people not to shoot at you and that has what happened in the past. host: how concerned are you about the money being spent on this effort right now and what it means for future commitments in iraq? caller: we are trillions of dollars in debt and i don't think this will help it a lot. i haven't heard israel say anything about what they think. unlike your summary comment if they have heard what their position is. -- i'd like to hear someone comment if they have heard what their position is. host: noting that the u.s. has billion in training and equipping the iraq army before the u.s. withdrew in 2011.

they declined to estimate the cost of the current operation beyond giving a general figure that the cost has been $7.5 million a day since june 16. million figure would put the cost at $700 million since june 16 or the airstrikes, intelligence and surveillance flights. we will be talking more about the cost of these operations in our last segment today. u.s. fundingng at of counterterrorism operations. i believe that congress should vote before the elections, and that they need to take a look at the newer technology for fighting wars. mccain and graham

were representing -- recommending boots on the ground. we need to be focusing on that type of warfare. i'll we think of old men talking and young men dying. we need to take a look at the way we fight wars. host: you say you want this vote before the november elections, would your member of congress's opinion on the vote if it did take place, would it change your vote? caller: definitely. host: where would you want your member to meet you? beler: i want them to specific about how we will be fighting these wars and not just that we will go to war. and to look at the budget. doing line item types of information would be helpful for voters. part we will stay in that of the country. henry, south dakota is next. i'm wondering where

these terrorists get their money and weaponry. whenever you see them they are in the back of trucks and cars going down the highway, shooting in the air without regard for what they are shooting at. they seem to be well supplied, who is sending them money? hand over fist. have you heard about that? host: you are more concerned about the president being able to take action to stop the flow of money in to these islamic state militants? do you think having a vote i congress would slow that process down or do you think the president has the ability to do these things now? caller: a while back when schwarzkopf was running the show, he didn't wait for anyone to tell him how to run a war. he just took over a lot he didn't tell them the direction he was going, he would have a

meeting next week and following that, go from there. we need somebody to run this thing. firen't lay around, by the -- host: on our twitter feed. how can congress authorize anything, they are never in session? latest polling, we turn to the wall street journal. obama'sg president runtime address on confronting the islamic state. what you know, do you support or oppose the decision president obama made when it comes to taking action against isis in iraq and syria? it, 20 2%ey support say they oppose it and 13% say they are not sure. how much confidence do you have

that the u.s. will be able to accomplish the goals president obama outlined in his speech? a great said they had deal of confidence, 11% said they had quite a bit of competence, and a full 68% said they had just some or very little confidence. we are taking your thoughts this morning for the next five or 10 minutes or so. should congress authorize the use of force? comment is that i would like to see some of these chicken hawks in some of these constitutional scholars that carry the constitution in their pocket all the time, to explain why they shouldn't have to vote for this. it is a very serious matter and it seems like all they want to do is push it down the road and then snipe at the president for whatever he does. they will find something to criticize while keeping their hands clean. i would like to know how my

congressman and my senators would vote for the election. it would affect my vote. host: how would affect your vote? already bootsare on the ground in iraq. they are called citizens. if they are not willing to standup and defend their own country, i don't see why we should sacrifice anymore american life. in california on our line for independents. i think the question itself is specious. the authorization for the use of military force is the wrong question. , abstract inrity this case, is not allowed by the constitution. requiresitution specific authority, not abstract authority. the war powers paragraph doesn't

enumerate that the president has the power to go to war. want to seeo you from congress and the next couple of weeks? caller: congress has to understand its obligation. it has failed in any number of ways. the framers were very explicit about the using of war powers as the ultimate tool of government. it requires the ultimate response from our representatives to help make -- take that action. just a couple of stories i want to show you. the headline from "the wall street journal." obama plans major ebola offensive. ebola is the virus that has an outbreak in west africa. the president is expected to combat ebolalan to

on tuesday. among the possible moves would be sending additional portable hospitals and doctors. conducting training for health workers in liberia and other countries that have been struck. that story in the "wall street journal." it is also noting that there will be fed meetings that will be closely watched on tuesday and wednesday when federal reserve chairwoman janet yellen will be speaking. she has spent much of this year winding down that on hiding program that was meant to hold down long-term investment rates and an eventual increase in the short-term rate. that tapering began before hurt tenure started. seeking to complete a new plan for managing the mechanics of future rate changes. of your a few more calls. should congress authorize the

use of force against isis? on our line for independents. i was wondering, i may be wrong, does isis have an air force or navy? and how would they get over here to fight us if they don't have any of this? why don't we leave them to themselves? nobody gave america to us we had to take it back. i don't trust america to do anything right in this situation. we don't have such a great record with what we do with our soldiers. everything they fought for, 4800 guys were killed and i'm told wounded and mangled for no reason. we just give it back to isis in three weeks? i think we have had enough over there and i don't want to see another group of americans lost for people that don't like us.

what are we getting out of it? host: to your first point. there has been some concern, talking about capitol hill, about isis fighters, especially those with american passports coming back and committing terrorist acts in the united states. are you saying that doesn't concern you? caller: if we knew who they were, and i'm sure we must be tracking these people somehow. i'm not really worried about it because they will do it anyway. as far as i'm concerned if we just stayed out of it and shut up, we could do other things to secure our borders and just say no, you can't come here on a visa or any other thing. the kids that came here on visas that we can't seem to find, thousands of those, have disappeared. dana in gordo, alabama on the line for independents. just to the last

caller's point. every time we stay out of something like this, something like 9/11 happens. i don't think we should stay out. i love our alabama senators. he is a true jesus christ lover and he loves our country and i would like to see them vote during -- vote. trust this president or the white house administration after seeing him play golf and stuff. voteld love to see them before november on this. ladyerstand there is a they have in mind as the head. once that happens i believe all of these americans would change their mind. need toe these people be wiped off the face of the earth. host: our last caller in this

segment, later in today's show we will talk about the legal justification behind the resident's efforts in iraq and syria. and the cost of u.s. counterterrorism efforts. next talk with documentary filmmaker ken burns and jeffrey ward about the roosevelts that began airing last night on pbs. here is just a part of that documentary. [video clip] >> they belonged to different parties. they overcame different obstacles. i had different temperaments and styles of leadership. it was the similarities and not the differences between the two that meant the most to history. both were children of privilege who came to see themselves as champions of the working man and earned the undying