Lawmakers Agree on Need for Special Session of Congress : Mideast: But local representatives are not united over what such a meeting on attacking Iraq would accomplish.

Although local representatives generally agree that President Bush should call a special session of Congress before attacking Iraq, they disagree along party lines about what such a session would accomplish.

Republicans said a special session would be needed to show that the President and Congress are unified in their response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. But local Democrats said the Republican President needs to come before Congress to persuade lawmakers and the American people that war is necessary.

The six lawmakers representing the San Fernando, Antelope and Santa Clarita valleys also said in interviews last week that their constituents are growing increasingly concerned over the prospect of war. Those fears have increased since Bush decided 11 days ago to send up to 240,000 additional troops to the Persian Gulf region to beef up the offensive capabilities of the fighting force there.

None of the legislators favor immediate military action but all said that war may be inevitable if economic and diplomatic sanctions fail to force Iraq out of Kuwait. They also generally agreed that Bush need not call a special session until shortly before the outbreak of war.

Rep. Anthony C. Beilenson (D-Los Angeles), who chairs the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, praised Bush for maintaining regular contact with congressional leaders during the body’s winter recess.

But he said the Constitution requires the President to seek a declaration of war from Congress before striking Iraqi forces. So far, Bush has refused to commit himself to asking for congressional approval of such an action.

“He has to spell out in a compelling way why we are there and why we are prepared to take offensive action,” Beilenson said in an interview. By sending additional troops, the lawmaker said, Bush “has put himself in a situation where it will be very, very hard for him not to take military action.”

Perhaps the most critical appraisal of the situation came from Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Panorama City), who said Bush has not been upfront with the American public about why troops are needed in the region. Berman said Bush’s real goal is not so much to force Iraq out of Kuwait, as the President has publicly stated, but to prevent Iraq from becoming a nuclear and economic superpower in the Middle East.

“The only justification for the loss and risking of American lives is that more people and more Americans will be threatened five years from now” if Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is not stopped soon, Berman said. “But I don’t think that George Bush has made that point.”

Bush, Berman charged, wants to blunt criticism for the Reagan Administration’s role in building up Iraq’s military strength while the United States supported Iraq during its eight-year war with neighboring Iran. Aid from the United States and other Western nations helped Iraq build up its nuclear and biological warfare capabilities, he said.

Berman, who was among a handful of representatives who several years ago lobbied against providing military support for Iraq, urged Bush to reconvene Congress so members can engage in a full discussion of U.S. goals in the region.

“The Constitution says Congress should participate in this process,” he said.

Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-Simi Valley), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he had an aide hand a letter to Bush on Thursday asking the President to call a joint session of Congress to “reaffirm U.S. goals in the Persian Gulf.”

He said the key issue in the region “is the act of aggression that the nation of Iraq has perpetrated against another nation.”

“What I’ve asked for is not because anyone has done anything questionable from a constitutional standpoint,” Gallegly said. “This is to show unity.”

The legislators said the need for inexpensive oil was not by itself reason enough to go to war.

Bob Cochran, executive assistant to Rep. Carlos J. Moorhead (R-Glendale), said Moorhead sees no immediate need to reconvene Congress, especially after Bush reassured senior lawmakers Wednesday that he would allow more time for the economic sanctions already in place to bring about an Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait.

But Moorhead, who was unavailable for comment because he is vacationing, favors a special session of Congress if the situation escalates, Cochran said.

“Bush is going to want the Congress’ support,” Cochran said. “The last thing he will want is for Congress to oppose the action.”

Of the legislators, only Rep. William M. Thomas (R-Bakersfield), whose district includes portions of the Antelope Valley, said there is no need to call a special session of Congress before going to war.

“We have an appropriate legislative apparatus to keep in check an overly aggressive executive,” Thomas said in a brief statement. “Moreover, let us not forget that President Bush’s moves in the Middle East have been supported across-the-board on a bipartisan basis, and around the world.”

But Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles) said the fact that Bush is seeking United Nations approval for an offensive strike makes it even more imperative that he obtain a go-ahead from Congress.

“I don’t see how the President of the United States can call on the U. N. to vote on a resolution approving the use of force against Iraq but not call on Congress to vote on the same act if he plans to go to war,” Waxman said.

Waxman also said the President so far has failed to clearly explain his objectives in the region.

“I think he has the support from most people with respect to supporting Saudi Arabia, but I don’t think he has made a case for us going into a war resulting in thousands and thousands of casualties,” Waxman said.

Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands), whose district includes part of the Antelope Valley, has said he approves of Bush’s handling of the Persian Gulf crisis, including last week’s decision to send additional troops to the region.

Lewis could not be reached for comment on whether Bush should seek a congressional declaration of war if the situation escalates. But his spokesman, David LesStrang, said that for the time being, the lawmaker sees no need to reconvene Congress.

“He doesn’t feel like all 535 members of Congress should be acting as their own individual secretaries of state,” LesStrang said. “The President is our commander-in-chief and it’s his job to take actions that are in the best interests of the country.”