478 CHAPTER 15|FOREIGN POLICY
Of course, members of Congress always have the power to block a president’s
foreign policy initiatives, but doing so requires enacting a law with enough votes to
override a presidential veto (often an impossible task). In the debate over funding
for the Iraq War, in 2007 the House and Senate passed a funding resolution that
included a withdrawal timeline for U.S. troops, but it was approved by a margin of
only a few votes in each chamber. After President Bush vetoed the resolution, the
two Houses passed a new funding resolution that dropped these restrictions. The
“How It Works” diagram illustrates the basic powers of Congress and the presi-
dent when it comes to military confl ict.THE FEDERAL COURTS
The federal courts, including the Supreme Court, weigh in on foreign policy ques-
tions through judicial review. This involves determining whether laws, regula-
tions, and presidential actions are consistent with the Constitution. For example, a
series of lower court and Supreme Court decisions forced the Bush administration
to revise its policies of holding terror suspects indefi nitely without charges; the rul-
ings required that the suspects be charged with crimes and tried on those charges.^30
Although the courts can reverse presidential actions, it is worth noting that these
trials occurred only after several cases spent years proceeding through the judicial
system. During that time the administration’s policy remained in place.^31GROUPS OUTSIDE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
Foreign policy choices are also infl uenced by a variety of individuals and groups
outside government. These actors range from corporate, citizen, and single-
interest groups to the media, public opinion, and international and nongovern-
mental organizations. Here we explore how these groups participate in the making
of foreign policy.INTEREST GROUPS
Interest groups are organizations that work to convince elected offi cials and
bureaucrats to implement policy changes in line with the group’s goals. A diverse
set of groups and organizations lobby government over foreign policy, including
some foreign corporations.^32 Lobbying eff orts can even involve foreign govern-
ments. In these cases, lobbying eff orts center on economic and military aid, trade
deals, and more general eff orts to improve a country’s image among members of
Congress and the bureaucracy.
Sometimes interest group lobbying pits business interests against moral con-
cerns. For example, during the debate over granting China more favorable trade
terms with U.S. companies in 2007, some groups argued that the legislation should
be shelved until the Chinese government guaranteed religious freedoms to its citi-
zens.^33 Other groups favored imposing tariff s on Chinese goods as retaliation for
the Chinese government’s refusal to revalue its currency—a move that would make
Chinese goods more expensive and help U.S. manufacturers. Ultimately, members
of Congress sympathetic to both groups blocked the trade proposals, although the
U.S. government did implement some trade agreements with China that did not
require congressional approval.^34