The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and U.S. Senate debate, August 1964

¶ … Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and U.S. Senate Debate

The Senatorial debate that led up to the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and, ultimately, the Vietnam War is rich with subtext. Probing reveals deeper shades of meaning and implication in the Senators' words, which are not necessarily apparent at first glance. In particular, it is intriguing to question the degree to which supporters of the resolution recognized the flimsy basis for their imagined control over the executive branch, should the resolution be endorsed. Despite ultimate proof that U.S. forces had provoked North Vietnam in the Gulf of Tonkin, supporters were willing to grant the president extreme latitude to commit military action without a declaration of war from Congress. How aware were the supporters of the resolution of the reality that by granting the president this power, they were quite literally cutting themselves out of the political loop?

We cannot, for instance, assume that the Senators were not aware of the Constitutional issues surrounding the resolution and the powers it would afford the president. Senator Morse explained first that Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution that any financial appropriation must be approved through Congress and that the President cannot simply appropriate funds to further his own goals or to manipulate foreign policy, such as engaging in conflict in Southeast Asia. He goes on to point out, perhaps, the more important point. That is that the President, under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution cannot declare war. That power rests solely with Congress. Morse made the cogent point that "No President has legal authority under the Constitution to send American boys to their death on a battlefield in the absence of a declaration of war." Morse makes the compelling argument that the President has no Constitutional power to act in this fashion and should not be granted a resolution to that effect, which effectively sidesteps the Constitution and its checks and balances system.

Interestingly, supporters of the resolution seemed unfazed by this realization. Senator Cooper's back-and-forth with Senators Russell and Fulbright demonstrates this. He continued to probe the nature of the powers the resolution would grant, ultimately articulating that it amounted to approving of the President's current actions and supporting any future ones the President determines to be necessary. Senator Cooper asked, "Then, looking ahead, if the President decided that it was necessary to use such force as could lead into war, we will give him that authority by this resolution?" The supporters agree that this is the case, upon which Cooper points out it is important for Congress and the public to understand what the resolution could lead to.