House sends mixed message to Obama over Libya campaign (UPDATES)

The U.S. House voted down a resolution that would have granted President Barack Obama authority for military intervention in Libya for another year, but then muddled its message by defeating a measure to cut funding for the U.S. effort there.

The vote on the resolution to support the mission was 123 to 295, with dozens of Democrats joining Republicans in voting against the resolution, which would have given permission for a "limited" operation for one year. It would not have allowed for U.S. ground troops in Libya.

But then, the House went on to defeat a bill that would have curtailed funding for U.S. involvement in the Libya conflict, according to the Christian Science Monitor. That measure would have prohibited money for direct combat activity, limiting funding to support operations including operational planning and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, according to the New York Times. Only 180 House members supported the measure, while 238, including 89 Republicans, voted against it.

CBS News said:

…The new bill clearly went a step too far for a significant segment of House Republicans who, while they disapprove of the way the president has handled the conflict in Libya, did not want to cut off funding for troops.

"Don't let a dispute between the legislative branch and executive branch result in us pulling the rug out from standing up for freedom," urged Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R.-Ill. "America has a responsibility to finish this through."

According to Politico, Republicans — and some Democrats —argued against authorizing the Libya mission along one of two main lines:

• that the United States should not be engaged in Libya
• and that the president failed to seek congressional consent under the War Powers Act.

According to Politico, Obama had concluded that U.S. action in Libya, including missile strikes, did not constitute “hostilities” and therefore did not require him to get consent from Congress.

The rejection of the earlier resolution is not likely to force any change in Obama’s course in Libya, writes David A. Fahrenthold in the Washington Post.

"In fact, the president has already said he does not need Congress’s permission — which means, by his reasoning, Friday’s first vote was academic."