While it has fallen out of the news cycle to some degree in recent months, the terrorist organization calling itself the Islamic State or ISIS has suddenly regained the media’s attention. With the incredibly barbaric and brutal murder of captured Jordanian fighter pilot, Lt. Moath al-Kasasbeh, and the reported death of American hostage Kayla Mueller, Americans have been reminded of the horrifying atrocities ISIS has been perpetrating in Syria and Iraq. It is in this environment that President Obama has asked Congress to authorize the full use of the military in fighting ISIS.

This Wednesday (February 11, 2015), President Obama made his request public. Obama is not asking for the authorization for “long-term, large-scale ground combat operations like those our nation conducted in Iraq and Afghanistan,” but his proposal would enable our forces to run small-scale missions, including rescue operations, targeted attacks on ISIS strongholds, capture or kill missions for ISIS leadership, and to assist other operations. This authorization would expire in three years, giving Congress and the next President the option to extend the mission if they believe it is still necessary.

The Republicans and many conservative pundits have been complaining for months about Obama’s lack of action in dealing with ISIS. They have pointed to his apparent lack of a plan and his lack of strong words about ISIS as proof of his weakness, saying that America needs to take action to conquer ISIS’s evil forces. If we assume that the Republicans were sincere in these beliefs, then we would have to expect them to be pleased that the president is finally proposing to take action and take the fight to ISIS. However, that is not what we are seeing.

Republican House Speaker John Boehner made a statement on Wednesday, saying that President Obama’s request is insufficient, and does not give America’s military commanders “the flexibility and authority they need,” forgetting, perhaps, that the President of the United States is the Commander-in-Chief of our military forces. In the past, Republicans have claimed that a prohibition against a large-scale ground invasion of ISIS territory by US troops would “tie the president’s hands,” despite the fact that the president wants to avoid just such an invasion. Now they are warning that debate over authorizing Obama’s request will take months.

Don’t get me wrong – by no means am I President Obama’s biggest fan. However, the president has issued a comprehensive plan to cooperate with our allies in combating the ISIS threat, and the Republicans in Congress are blocking the plan. Remember, this is a group that has publicly executed western journalists and aid workers and burned a Jordanian soldier alive, has killed thousands of civilians in Iraq and Syria, and is committing war crimes and ethnic cleansing on what Amnesty International has called an “historic scale.” And now the Republicans in Congress are going to prevent us from fighting them under the pretense of “debate?”

This shameful display by our elected representatives is yet another clear sign that our government has little to no interest in actually governing. For these attorneys and Wall Street cronies, every event is just an opportunity to score political points in the hopes of getting reelected, so they can keep making money for themselves and their friends on Wall Street. Even this deadly serious moment in history is not enough to get them to behave like responsible adults and act in the best interests of our country.

We need to put an end to this. These irresponsible, corrupt, short-sighted politicians need to be replaced with real Americans – people who care about what’s right and who will do what is necessary to make our nation safe and prosperous. I am dedicated to making this change. If the American people see fit to elect me in 2016, I will work tirelessly to do what needs to be done. If you want a government that cares about results instead of appearances, I urge you to join me by casting your write-in vote for Art Drew in the 2016 Presidential election.