By Julian Pecquet - 06/25/13 10:50 PM EDT
“This bipartisan legislation will ensure we can maintain our diplomatic and humanitarian efforts to support the Syrian people without getting drawn into another engagement,” Gibson said. “Moving forward, it is vital that Congress be a part of this debate and provide authorization prior to any hostile action or escalation of our involvement.”
Sens. Rand PaulRand PaulHow low is the bar for presidential candidates, anyway? Lawmaker seeks to investigate Obama's foreign tax compliance law Funding bill rejected as shutdown nears MORE (R-Ky.) and Mike LeeMike LeeICANN is already under foreign government influence: the proof is in the pudding Senators express 'grave concerns' about ObamaCare 'bailout' Funding bill rejected as shutdown nears MORE (R-Utah) partnered with Chris MurphyChris MurphySenators press State Department on 'plan B' in Syria Could Snapchat be the digital bridge to younger voters? Saudi skeptics gain strength in Congress MORE (D-Conn.) and Tom UdallTom UdallTensions rise over judicial nominees Dem senator wants to change nomination rules amid Garland fight Dem senators back Navajo lawsuit against EPA MORE (D-N.M.) on lnearly identical legislation, barring the Obama administration from “supporting, directly or indirectly, military or paramilitary operations in Syria,” last week. The bill has an exemption for “non-lethal humanitarian assistance.”
Neither bill is likely to get much traction, despite polls showing 70 percent of Americans are wary of arming the rebels. Murphy, Udall and Paul were the only “no” votes when legislation to arm the rebels cleared the Senate Foreign Relations panel by a 15-3 vote last month.
Please send tips and comments to Julian Pecquet: email@example.com