Since the conception of the United States through the Articles of Confederation, and later the Constitution, there has been much discussion on what powers should be bestowed to the upper echelon of government. With the Revolutionary War still fresh in the minds of the framers, and the causes for it, they exercised extreme caution in granting powers to one man and one man alone. One specific power was that of war and the ability to wage and make decisions in it. In the Constitution Congress has the power to wage war, and the president was bestowed with title commander in chief to make decisions in war time should it come. However, clear cut as the constitution may seem decades of technological, economic, political, and military advancements has made what war means different. For this argument I will be taking the CON side along with Bob Baur, because from his writing although some power has been transferred to the President much still lies in the hands of Congress even if it is not obvious.

            The decisions the President makes on waging war or conflicts are difficult ones that must happen sometimes in hours or days. In political time it is a mere snapshot that would not mesh with how Congress is designed to work. Some acts have enabled the president to engage in these spurs of the moment engagements, but importantly they remain obscure enough to allow Congress to make moves from behind the curtain. These “hidden” powers are things like pressuring the president through public, or public support with hidden bills limiting the time of deployment or engagement. No matter what the president does in waging war (constitutional or not) the congress as of this paper has the ability to adjust how and if that war is waged making the usurpation of one power somewhat meaningless.