Limiting Use of Funds for Armed Forces in Libya

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, on March 19 of this year, the President sent us into military activity, or war, in Libya. Within 48 hours, the President notified the Congress in accordance with the War Powers Act of his decision to do so. For 60 days, the President under the War Powers Act had the opportunity, and chose not to, to come to this body and make the case as to why being in Libya was important. On the 60th day, he wrote a letter to this body saying that he would welcome authorization but he's not asking for it.

Time and time again on the Armed Services Committee, we were presented
with speakers from the administration who would give certain updates on various matters to which I would ask: Are you here to ask authorization for ongoing activity in Libya? And the speakers, the witnesses, would say, ``No.''

After 90 days and the President has not ceased activity or hostilities in Libya, the time has come and gone and we've sent our indication over to the administration time and time again that we disapprove. But because the War Powers resolution, by some either Republican or Democrat or in the House or the Senate, is questionable whether or not they consider it constitutional or not, the President has operated in what we now know is called the zone of twilight as to whether or not he even needs our approval.

So what are we left with? Mr. Speaker, we're left with, today, our ability under the power of the purse to restrict funds from ongoing operations in Libya. Without it and without the Supreme Court weighing in on whether or not the War Powers is unconstitutional, in my opinion, the President is breaking the law, but he is being restricted by nobody and being able to continue unfettered.

Some have said that the War Powers resolution isn't worth the paper that it is written on. To that I say: Based on what Supreme Court decision? Based on what precedent? There is none, because the courts haven't weighed in on it. I know some of our colleagues here have a pending case before the Court, and I wish them well, but what if they don't accept the case? What if they say these Members, as they have said before, don't have standing? Then we're right back to square one.

Mr. Speaker, today we have the opportunity to send a message to the executive branch, and this transcends party but it exerts our power under the separation of powers, to say we, the House of Representatives, are relevant; we, the House of Representatives, are exercising our ability that the Founding Fathers gave us in the ability to declare war because they wanted us to have this deliberation, this debate that we're having here today, arguments that have been made on both sides that have been very good, because the last thing that we want as Americans is for some President, whether it's this President or some future President, to be able to pick fights around the world without any debate from another branch of government.

It's the most difficult thing we have to do as government officials, and that's send our kids into harm's way. So it has to be a sober, deliberative, long debate, and the President has 60 days and chose not to engage in that debate. So here we are today saying, if you choose not to come here and get authorization, we are going to stop it until you do. The President always has the ability in the future to come and try to get authorization for what he's doing in Libya or anywhere else.

So, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of my bill to withdraw funding from future engagement in Libya.

I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source