Earlier today President Obama
refused to
rule out the possibility of authorizing military action in
Syria even without Congressional authorization. Instead he
told reporters at a press conference in St. Petersburg that “I
think it would be a mistake for me to jump the gun and speculate
because, right now, I’m working to get as much support as possible
out of Congress.” Subsequent the press conference, Tony Blinken, a
top White House aid told National Public Radio the President does
not intend to authorize US military force in Syria without
Congressional backing,
contending “The president of course has the authority to act,
but it’s neither his desire nor his intention to use that authority
absent Congress backing him.”

Despite reassurance from Blinken, there is still reason to
believe the president may unilaterally act without Congressional
approval. However, recent polls suggest this would be a mistake. A
recent
NBC/WSJ poll found 79 percent of Americans agreed the president
must receive Congressional approval before authorizing airstrikes
against Syria. Only 16 percent thought Obama does not need
Congressional approval to intervene.

An
Economist/YouGov poll dug deeper finding that 41 percent
believe the “President must always get Congressional approval prior
to the use of force.” At the same time, a similar share (38
percent) tolerate greater subjective power to the president
agreeing that the “President should get Congressional approval when
possible, but should not be required to get approval in
emergencies.” The issue with Syria is that only 21 percent of the
public views the Syrian civil war as an immediate threat to US
national security.
Polls already consistently find broad opposition to military
intervention in Syria. Without Congressional approval of
airstrikes, President Obama risks further alienating the American
public.