Evening star., 1948-01-21
War Powers Revival
Creates New Problem
For Congress 10 Face
Whom Are We Fighting?
Legislators Wonder on
Anti-InfIution Moves
By David Laurence

Is there O "state of war" against
Germany and another state Of war"
against Russia?
Congress is beginning to get itself
entangled in the revival" Of war
powers" in order to combat imitation,
and yet there is no preamble stating
what war America is supposed to
be fighting at the moment.
Last month, for example, the So
called anti-infiation bill undertook to
revive" certain provisions of the
Second, War Powers Act and re-
ferred to that law by name. But the
Second War Powers Act was passed
originally with a preamble reciting
the existence of a state of war
against Germany and Japan. In
that war, Russia was an ally so that
the use of the same war powers to
cover situations arising out of COM
plications with our allies presents
some embarrassments. Technically
speaking, the Russians are still our
Allies.
Congress, Of course, has the con-
stitutional power to declare war.
The majority, however, did not say
in December that it was reviving
certain war powers for the President
because of any new war. The word
revive" was used to imply that in
some way the war against Germany
and Japan was continuing to exist.
Yet all the measures being taken
for interim aid to Europe and for
the Marshall Plan will involve the
power to allocate the use of COM
modities because these articles are
needed to combat communism or to
stop the progress Of Soviet Russia.
Could Cause Embarrassment.
It would appear that Congress, If
anxious to proceed under its war
powers, either would have to de-
clare "state of war" existing as
against Russia in order to revive
war powers or else to invent new
set Of war powers-those of "un-
declared war"
The United States, during the
period between September, 1899, and
December, 1941, took several legisla-
tive steps as part of the national
emergency and the broad phrase
national defense" was availed of to
cover all manner of preparations for
resisting possible attack by either
Germany or Japan. Today, how
ever, none of the legislation to allo-
cate commodities has been tied up
with national defense, though there
have been some references to "re-
vival" of war powers.
It Is the mention of "war powers"
which could conceivably cause en-
barrassment to our Government, for
certainly nobody is ready to say
officially in any laws or regulations
that a state of war" exists against
Russia. Likewise, it can hardly be
argued persuasively that America is
still at war with a nonexistent Ger
man government. ...
Peace Pact Not Required.
Congress in the past has not re-
quired that peace treaty be signed
in order to end state of war" In
1921. Congress by unilateral reso-
luton, declared the state of war
with Germany to be at an end.
Otherwise there could have been an
indefinite postponement of the Off
ciaI ending of war and powers
given in wartime emergencies could
have been invoked at will during
peacetime.
It is really unnecessary for Con-
gress to revive any war powers If
it wishes to combat imitation. The
constitutional power to regulate
commerce is broad enough to cover
almost anything that Congress may
wish to do along economic lines.
For the Supreme Court has said
that Congress has virtually un-
limited power now over production,
wages and prices. 1t isn't really
essential for legislative purposes to
have a declared or undeclared war.
Besides, our diplomats will be
growing uneasy if they are ques-
toned as to the meaning of legisla-
ton that specifically speaks of a
revival" of war powers. These can
hardly be explained as being di-
rected against an enemy that has
already been conquered, when every
body knows such legislation is really
aimed at a situation created by an
entirely different enemy"
Reproduction Rights Reserved)