…replaced with new legislation that would require the president to inform Congress of any plans to engage in “significant armed conflict,” or non-covert operations lasting longer than a week. In turn, Congress would act within 30 days, either approving or disapproving the action.

Here’s a link to the full report from the National War Powers Commission, for those of you who want to consult it.

The story also says:

The plan identified by Baker and Christopher…would create a consultative process between the White House and Congress that currently does not exist. Also, calling on Congress to respond would exert significant political pressure on a president if he ignored lawmakers’ wishes.

The panel studied the issue for more than a year and consulted more than three dozen experts. Other members of the panel include former Democratic Rep. Lee Hamilton, who in 2006 led the Iraq Study Group with Baker; former Attorney General Edwin Meese III, and Strobe Talbott, former deputy secretary of state.

Do you remember the reasons for the original resolution in 1973? Was there a valid reason at the time for the process we have now? Should it be changed? Why or why not?

The St. Louis Symphony Orchestra has an important new partnership: Wachovia Securities will be the title sponsor of the ensemble’s main orchestral series for the next three seasons.

Neither Symphony President Fred Bronstein nor Wachovia spokesman Justin Gioia would disclose the exact dollar amount. However, said Bronstein, “over time, it’s a gift that’s significantly into the six figures.”

With the sponsorship comes this: “The ‘Wachovia Securities Orchestral Series’ name will apply to a total of more than 60 performances over the 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 seasons. It will appear immediately on signs, advertising and other marketing material.”

I confess that I’m not a patron of the orchestra. But broadly speaking, corporate sponsorship such as this seems to be becoming more commonplace. And with it, of course, comes naming rights.

What are the downsides of such sponsorship? Are there upsides beyond the obvious? Are there unusual sponsorships that you’ve run across in your experience?

Presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama says he supports the efforts of that office and would allow it to continue. In fact, he says he would “expand it to direct more money to religious groups,” according to a story out today.

The announcement by the Democrats’ presumptive nominee was met by suggestions that he was merely trying to curry favor with religious voters, a segment of the electorate in which he has failed thus far to carve inroads. Four years ago, Democratic nominee John Kerry captured just 22 percent of the white evangelical vote.

Others welcomed Obama’s promise, which he reaffirmed during a speech in St. Louis on Saturday before delegates attending a national conference of the African Methodist Episcopal Church. Those who applaud Obama’s vow see it as a step in the right direction, toward a lasting partnership between faith-based organizations and the government that would not violate the separation of church and state.

Which camp are you in? Do you believe the office is a good initiative worthy of continuing — and are you pleased to see that Obama is as interested in continuing it as the current president? Or is his support seen as a way to reach out to conservative, religious voters?

Bissinger’s Blueberry and Açai Gummy Pandas brought home a Special Outstanding Food Innovation Award from the National Association for the Specialty Food Trade’s Fancy Food Show in New York. The association recognized winners in 32 categories, chosen from more than 2,000 entries. The judges evaluated taste, packaging and originality and recognized Bissinger’s for “outstanding confection.”

Honestly, we might have talked about this before. I just can’t remember. But it’s a holiday weekend, so let’s try something a little sweet for a change.

I’ve always been a sucker for chocolate. I’ll eat gummy…stuff — bears, pandas, whatever. But if the choice is between any kind of chocolate and anything else, chocolate’s going to win (unless you try and foist “white” chocolate on me).

Favorites: Butterfinger candy bars. York Peppermint Patties. Dove dark chocolate.

How about you? What’s your favorite now? And when you were younger?

Moore goes on: “Maybe instead of a fabulous shopping spree (at Lane Bryant) and then going out to dinner (at the Cheesecake Factory), I’ll just go buy something small and go to a nicer grocery store.”

Here’s another key piece of info from the story:

Glenn MacDonald, a professor of economics and strategy at the Washington University business school, explains that despite the general feeling that we have less to spend on the things we want, there is no data to support calling it a recession.

In fact, the figures say that spending has risen every month this year and will continue to do so.

So what do you think? Does it feel like a recession to you? Have you changed your shopping/buying habits at all in the past few months? If so, what’s pushed you to do it? If not, where’s the spark of optimism that keeps you going?

Hey, did any of you see Angelina Jolie in Mr. & Mrs. Smith, driving a Chrysler minivan just like she was Steve McQueen in Bullitt? That was my minivan she was driving, folks!

Anyway, riddle me this, loyal readers: Why does the minivan get such a bad rap? Why did it lose favor to the massive SUV? Why didn’t the minivan ever catch on with the cool crowd?

And if the minivan had sex appeal (and heaven knows, Angelina Jolie tried!), would Chrysler be in the position it’s in now?

If you have a minivan — or have ever driven one — tell us what you liked or didn’t like about it. If you haven’t, tell us why you’re always hatin’ on us minivan drivers!

UPDATE: There was so much interest in this topic that we created an IWitness reader photo album on minivans. Will you share your photos of your favorite minivan? I’ve got one of mine in there now. Call this a counterpoint to our “cool cars” album.

The economy isn’t doing so hot anyway, so you can add that to the list of problems you’ve got to deal with.

The people who really control Chrysler just announced today that “the automaker will idle completely the minivan plant and cut one of two production shifts at the truck plant in Fenton this fall for an indefinite period.”

That means 2,000 employees will be affected.

Suppose you were running the automaker. What would you do? Could you see this coming?

The current governor, Democrat Rod Blagojevich, refuses to carry out executions of the 14 people now on death row despite approving several reforms. Lawmakers have ignored legislative attempts to decide the issue. And prosecutors are slower to seek the death penalty.

Like today’s Associated Press story says, “It’s time for lawmakers to lift the moratorium or abolish the death penalty.”

DuPage County State’s Attorney Joseph Birkett said Gov. Blagojevich should lift the moratorium, saying the reforms have made it virtually impossible for the innocent to end up on death row.

“This has been a thoughtful, careful and informed set of reforms that all parties have had a chance to weigh in on and I don’t think the governor is even aware of these and the effect that they’re having across the state,” Birkett said.

But Jane Bohman, executive director of the Illinois Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, argues the capital punishment system has improved but is still flawed.

Other states have made more progress, including New Jersey, Virginia and California. Even Missouri has an execution planned for the near future.

Should Illinois lawmakers bring back executions?

Burke’s time in St. Louis has been marked by a number of controversies. He has condemned the ordination of “women priests” by another faith community. He has been in a battle over control of St. Stanislaus Church in St. Louis. He said he would not offer communion to politicians who do not stand by Catholic church doctrine.

What does his departure mean for the church here now? What are the qualities you’d like to see in his successor?

The proposed price does not reflect the strength of Anheuser-Busch’s global, iconic brands Bud Light and Budweiser, the top two selling beer brands in the world, with Budweiser selling in more than 80 countries today.

One might look at the board’s stance this way: We might be willing to sell the company — but not at the price you offered.

So is the board holding out for a better price? Or is it sincerely resisting a takeover attempt by the Belgium brewer? Is that a fruitful effort by A-B’s board? Or, realistically, is there anything they can really do to stop a takeover?