(7 of 8)
Off campus, some unexpected opposition to presidential policy developed. Chicago's Democratic Mayor Richard Daley, saying he had supported Nixon and past Presidents on the war, and that "I think we should stand by our President," nevertheless said he had changed his mind. "I don't think any President has the right, without approval of Congress, to carry on a war—and we've been in a war for ten years." Nine of Henry Kissinger's former staff members wrote to him declaring their admiration for much of what he has done in the past but deploring the mining and the bombing escalation. For this weekend, the National Peace Action Coalition and other antiwar groups have called a mass demonstration in Washington; the turnout may give an indication of how wide and enduring the opposition is.
Reckless. If domestic reaction remained ambiguous, congressional attitudes seemed to turn sharply more partisan. Republicans were under heavy White House pressure to support the President, and the appeal to stand behind him at a moment of crisis—even if it was self-inflicted—was effective. Yet some moderate Republicans seemed to be wavering. Illinois Republican Congressman John Anderson flatly protested: "I am unwilling to take the risk of war with the Soviet Union by engaging in attacks on their ships and planes. I don't think Viet Nam is that important." Vermont Senator George Aiken, a senior Republican who had deplored the North Vietnamese invasion, criticized the mining as ineffective and called it "brinkmanship."
Nixon's Democratic critics felt no need to hold back. As some 1,000 protesters held a dawn prayer vigil on the Capitol steps, timed to coincide with the activation of the mines, Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy declared: "We have a President who says he's interested in the honor of the United States, but he has despoiled that honor." New York Democratic Congressman Jonathan Bingham told the rally that the mining was "the act of an emperor, a dictator." More than 20 Democratic Congressmen filed suit in federal court to enjoin the President from continuing the war, claiming that he is "in violation of the separation of powers doctrine as set forth in the Constitution." Democratic Presidential Hopeful George McGovern said Nixon's decision was "reckless, unnecessary and unworkable, and is a flirtation with World War III." Hubert Humphrey protested that the President's action was "filled with unpredictable danger."
More substantively, the Senate Democratic caucus voted 29 to 14 to condemn the President's escalation of the war, and by a margin of 35 to 8 to demand a cutoff of funds for the war within four months after the Communists return P.O.W.s. This was meant to coincide with Nixon's latest offer, but it does not require a ceasefire. In the House, the Foreign Affairs Committee Democrats demanded a total U.S. withdrawal from Viet Nam by Oct. 1. Again, the only precondition would be release of the prisoners and safe withdrawal of U.S. troops.