-9999

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President, the Founders of our country understood the dangers of concentrating military power in the hands of a single individual.

They had seen how dangerous this can be, thanks to their experience with King George III. In fact, the specific charges against the King in our Declaration of Independence, as so many know, lay out ``a long train of abuses'' by the military.

When it came time to draft the Constitution of the United States, the Framers had to strike a balance between giving the President the flexibility to respond to attacks and imminent threats and safeguarding against military adventurism, so they gave Congress--they gave this body--the power to declare war.

The practices of our early Presidents recognized the distinction between defensive military action--over which the President has control--under Article II of the Constitution and offensive operations, which must be approved by Congress in advance.

Fast forward to today; this process has broken down. And for the last three decades, this body has often neglected what is arguably its most important responsibility.

I think many Americans will be surprised to learn that these authorizations for use of military force--or AUMFs--especially the 1991 Gulf war resolution, are still on the books.

Today, these are, in the words of my friend Tim Kaine, who joins me on the floor today, ``zombie resolutions.'' They have fulfilled their purpose, and now they should be removed from our law.

Importantly, the repeal of the 1991 and 2002 resolutions would affect no current military operations. So the issue for us to consider is both what these AUMFs actually do authorize and what they could be used to authorize in the future.

It has been well over a decade since any administration has cited the 2002 AUMF to authorize any military action; however, leaving these authorities on the books creates an opportunity for abuse by the executive branch and bypasses Congress on the most important issue we consider as a body, which is how and when to send our men and women in uniform into harm's way.

On the topic of Iran as it relates to this effort, I share the views of so many of my colleagues on the need to counter Iran. I really do. But reimagining a more than 20-year-old authorization that was passed to combat a totally different enemy is not the way to do it.

Practically, repeal of the 1991 and 2002 AUMFs is very important because of the message that we send to our partner Iraq and to our other partners in the region and beyond.

Let us be clear. Saddam Hussein is dead, and we are no longer worried about the threat posed by Iraq, as stated in this AUMF, which we propose repealing.

Iraq has faced pressure from Iran for the past 20 years. The presence of the 1991 and 2002 AUMFs has not changed that. Going forward, as Iraq continues to face Iranian coercion and violence, we must increase our resolve to stand with them as partners, not as our enemy, and repealing these authorizations would help us do just that.

This legislation is the rare issue that brings together supporters of all political persuasions. It doesn't fall on party lines. It certainly doesn't fall on ideological or philosophical or geographical lines.

In addition to bipartisan congressional support from across the political spectrum, this important effort has earned the support of a number of outside groups. Just a few of them are the American Legion, Concerned Veterans for America, Heritage Action, and FreedomWorks.

Later this morning, we will vote on cloture on the motion to proceed to this important bill. We don't need to debate extensively whether or not we even proceed to consideration; therefore, I urge a ``yes'' vote as we work together to reclaim these important authorities and arrest the trend of giving away our war powers to an unchecked Executive.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source