To repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.

Madam Speaker, I thank the Chairwoman and all of the very important people on the Appropriations Committee for their work on this bill.

I ask the question, what side do you want to be on? Do you want to be on the side that provides our hardworking military pay raises for the troops, to be able to get money away from a misdirected war?

Do you want to be on the side that provides for working families?

Do you want to be on the side that stops those who can't pay for daycare to have that?

Do you want to be on the side of those who say, ``I am a Federal employee, and I have been shut out of my job''?

What side do you want to be on? I want to be on the side of negotiating an omnibus that works for the American people. I want my Republican friends to know that we have tried to negotiate, but we are adults and we are not going to let this government shut down.

What we are going to do is recognize these are dangerous times. We know that there is now an omicron variant. We are not going to play the antivaxxer game, we are not going to say that it is about vaccine mandates because we know that most of the Federal Government has been vaccinated; but what we are going to do is extend this resolution to keep the government open because the side that Democrats are on is the side of the American people and our government workers who go out and work every day and the families who go out and work every day.

I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. A shutdown would induce furloughs that could hit 62 percent of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, right in the middle of COVID-19.

In addition, families would be desperate as well.

I want you to understand that veterans would suffer. During the Thanksgiving holiday, I went to the veterans hospital. I can tell you, it is not empty. Veterans are there every day, and when they are there, they are getting services. Do you want to be part of a government shutdown where veterans hospitals are closed and veterans are standing outside with their hand asking what is happening?

I want to be on the side of those who understand the value of working for the American families and doing what Democrats have done, passing bills, passing laws that serve the American people.

Vote for the CR and vote for the omnibus so that we can get the job done. I thank the gentlewoman for her courtesies.

Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the Committees on the Judiciary, on Homeland Security, and on the Budget, I rise in support of H.R. 6119, the ``Further Extending Government Funding Act,'' which provides funding to continue the operations of the federal government through February 18, 2022, and avoids a wasteful and irresponsible shutdown, and also the underlying bill.

House Democrats passed government funding bills to create good paying jobs, support the hard-working middle class, and protect our national security; Senate Democrats have also released all their appropriations bills.

Without an omnibus, there will be a shortfall that will cause veterans not to receive their benefits in full.

For our national security, we need an omnibus to support defense readiness and modernization, sustain good-paying American jobs, secure our cyber infrastructure, and strengthen American leadership abroad.

Without an omnibus, a pay raise for troops will not be funded while funds will be misdirected to a war we are no longer fighting.

With a new deadline of February 18, we need Republicans to offer constructive proposals to address the critical issues facing the country by funding the federal government's important work for the American people.

Madam Speaker, I need not remind my colleagues that we are at a critical point in the fight against this pandemic--less than 24 hours ago, it was reported that the first case of the Omicron variant was confirmed in the United States.

Our response in the following days and weeks will be crucial.

Yet some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle in the House and the Senate have indicated that they intend to block the passage of this stopgap spending bill in order to trigger a shutdown of the Federal government unless a bill is passed that undoes President Biden's initiatives to vaccinate and test employees at large companies.

Simply put, this is irresponsible and dangerous at a time when we have a new threat on our soil in the form of the Omicron variant.

A government shutdown would induce furloughs that could hit 62 percent of employees at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control.

It would be nothing other than reckless to hamstring the agency at the center of America's fight against the COVID-19 pandemic at this time--we need all hands on deck.

In September, Congress voted on a bipartisan basis to extend government funding through December 3 to allow time for bicameral, bipartisan negotiations to complete omnibus government funding legislation.

Since then, House and Senate Republicans have refused to negotiate with Democrats on government funding.

In fact, while House and Senate Democrats have put forward their proposals, Republicans have not presented an offer of their own.

Therefore, the Appropriations Committee introduced H.R. 6119, the Further Extending Government Funding Act, which continues government funding at current levels through February 18.

It makes minimal changes to address the most urgent of needs during the period of the Continuing Resolution.

Although this bill is necessary, working families, small businesses, veterans, and our military need the certainty that comes with passing an omnibus as opposed to short-term funding patches.

Republicans must join us for bipartisan, bicameral negotiations to resolve our differences and keep government working for the people.

For our communities, we need an omnibus to create jobs by supporting small businesses, bolster our public health infrastructure to prevent future pandemics and medical research to save lives, strengthen public schools with a focus on those serving students with the highest need, protect our air and water through environmental protection and enforcement efforts, combat the opioid epidemic on the ground in our communities, and support core services such as food safety and consumer product inspections.

Without an omnibus, investments in all these areas will be denied.

For our veterans, we need an omnibus to provide sufficient funding for veterans' benefits, reduce backlogs for veterans and their families seeking assistance, and meet the needs of the VA's health care system.

Throughout the 117th Congress, House Democrats have worked to deliver results for the American people, passing legislation to address each pillar of the ``For The People'' agenda: lower health care costs, higher wages by rebuilding America, and cleaning up corruption and strengthening our Democracy.

And under the leadership of Speaker Pelosi, the House has passed hundreds of bills, including legislation to crush the COVID-19 pandemic, build our economy back better, lower health care and prescription drug prices, raise wages, advance economic and retirement security, end gun violence, act on the climate crisis, protect Dreamers, and strengthen voting rights.

For example, in this Congress the House has passed and sent to the President the following legislation that has been signed into law:

H.R. 1799, Paycheck Protection Program Extension Act:

This legislation extended the Paycheck Protection Program application deadline for two months through May 31, 2021 to help struggling businesses keep workers employed during COVID-19.

H.R. 1276, SAVE LIVES Act:

This law ensured that more veterans, their families, and caregivers got access to COVID-19 vaccines in a timely manner.

S. 937, COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act:

This law addresses the dramatic increase in hate crimes targeting the AAPI community since the start of the pandemic. This law designates a point person at the Department of Justice to review hate crimes related to the COVID-19 pandemic, bolsters state and local governments to improve their reporting of hate crimes and ensures that hate crime information is more accessible to Asian-American communities.

S. 475, Juneteenth National Independence Day Act:

This law established the first federal holiday in 38 years to formally recognize Juneteenth National Independence Day and commemorate the end of slavery in the United States.

House Democrats have also worked to advance critical pieces of legislation, which await action in the Senate:

H.R. 1, For The People Act:

This comprehensive legislation would promote government transparency, strengthen access to the ballot box and make it easier for Americans to exercise their right to vote, secure election infrastructure, and curb the influence of dark money in politics.

H.R. 5, Equality Act:

The Equality Act would codify consistent anti-discrimination legal protections for LGBTQ Americans by amending several existing civil rights laws to include explicit non-discrimination protections in key areas of life.

H.R. 6, Dream and Promise Act:

The Dream and Promise Act would protect Dreamers, Temporary Protected Status (TPS), and Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) status holders from deportation and provide an opportunity to obtain permanent legal status that would enable these groups to work legally within the United States and continue to contribute to their local communities and economy.

H.R. 7, Paycheck Fairness Act:

This bill would strengthen labor protections around equal pay by prohibiting the use of salary history to set compensation, provide more transparent options for joining class-action lawsuits challenging systemic discrimination, and require employers to show that gender pay gaps are job-related and consistent with business need.

H.R. 8, Bipartisan Background Checks Act and H.R. 1446, the Enhanced Background Checks Act:

These bills would modernize federal laws around gun sales. The former would close current loopholes that allow buyers to purchase guns without a background check in certain venues, while the latter would prevent gun sales from going through before background checks are completed.

H.R. 1280, the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act:

This bill, which House Democrats also passed in the 116th Congress 30 days after the murder of George Floyd, will address racial bias in policing, ensure accountability for police brutality and misconduct, and work to change the culture of law enforcement to promote better relationships with the communities they serve.

H.R. 842, Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act:

This bill aims to strengthen labor protections for union workers through overriding Republican-led ``right to work'' laws, promoting free and fair union elections, and holding companies that attempt to restrict union activity accountable.

H.J. Res. 17, Removing the Deadline for Ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment:

This resolution would remove the deadline for ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment in order to enshrine women's equality in the Constitution.

H.R. 1620, Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act:

This long-overdue legislation to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act passed the House with bipartisan support. It would reauthorize funding to vital grant programs that help prevent sexual assault, domestic violence, and improve access to resources for victims and survivors.

H.R. 3237, the Emergency Security Supplemental to Respond to 1/6 Appropriations Act:

This bill provides $1.9 billion in funding to secure the U.S. Capitol Complex and ensure the brave men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police have the resources they need to do

their jobs. The legislation responds to the direct costs incurred by the National Guard and DC police on January 6, provides funding to improve the security of windows and doors in the Capitol complex, and secures funds to improve Capitol Police training and equipment.

H.R. 3005, Legislation to #RemoveHate from the Capitol Building:

This bill would remove statues of those who perpetuated and supported slavery and segregation in this country, along with statues or busts of those who served voluntarily in the Confederate States of America, from public display in the U.S. Capitol.

H.R. 1603, the Farm Workforce Modernization Act:

This bipartisan bill would stabilize the agriculture industry's labor supply by reforming the H-2A guest worker program and creating a pathway to citizenship for agricultural workers, many of whom worked through the pandemic.

H.R. 51, the Washington, DC Admission Act:

This bill would admit Washington, DC as the 51st state in the Union and end the injustice in denying nearly 700,000 citizens the right to be represented fully in Congress. It would also end the unjust practice of treating District of Columbia residents differently when allocating government resources or relief.

H.R. 3985, ALLIES Act:

This bill would increase the visa cap and expedite the visa process for Afghan allies who worked alongside American military personnel, diplomats, development professionals, and partner forces, to help ensure they make it safely out of harm's way.

H.R. 803, Protecting America's Wildness and Public Lands Act:

This comprehensive bill would conserve and protect natural landscapes across America, designating over 1.5 million acres of public land as protected wilderness and withdrawing significant amount of public land from drilling and mining activities to promote a healthier environment.

H.R. 2467, the PFAS Action Act:

This bipartisan bill would improve the safety of Americans' drinking water by requiring the EPA to set a drinking water standard, prevent the future release of PFAS chemicals into our bodies of water, and start the process of cleaning up affected communities.

H.R. 256, Repeal of the 2002 AUMF Against Iraq:

This bill, which passed with bipartisan support, would repeal the 2002 Authorization of Military Force Against Iraq.

H.R. 1230, the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act:

The bipartisan Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act restores protections for older workers that were weakened in a 2009 Supreme Court ruling that made it harder for older workers to prove age based discrimination in the workplace.

H.R. 2662, the Inspectors-General Independence and Empowerment Act:

This bill seeks to promote government transparency and accountability by ensuring the independence of federal inspectors-general, allowing government watchdogs to act freely without fear of political pressure or threats. It would also protect whistleblowers from threats of retaliation by making it a violation of House rules for Members to reveal their identities.

In addition, three Congressional Review Act resolutions have been signed into law, overturning dangerous rules put in place by the Trump Administration:

S.J. Res 13, a CRA overturning an EEOC rule to address discrimination in the workplace;

S.J. Res. 14, a CRA addressing dangerous methane emissions; and

S.J. Res. 15, a CRA to protect against predatory lenders.

These along with many, many others are among the bills awaiting Senate action.

Madam Speaker, let me briefly list several of the programs vital to Americans that are protected or extended by H.R. 6119. The bill:

Provides waiver language for certain intelligence programs as well as agencies that operate under the State Department Basic Authorities Act and Foreign Relations Authorization Act;

Allows the Food and Nutrition Service to spend at a higher rate during the period covered by the legislation to provide supplemental USDA foods to low-income seniors (age 60 and over) and to some low- income women, infants and children up to age six.

Allows a higher spending rate for the White House to support continuing COVID-19 operations.

Allows the Small Business Administration flexibility to spend at the rate necessary to accommodate potential demand increases for commitments for business loans through the 7(a) and 504 business loans, for the Secondary Market Guarantee Program, and for the Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) program.

Allows District of Columbia voucher schools an additional year to be accredited and therefore remain in the program. The accrediting process requires in-school visits, which are not happening during the coronavirus.

Allows the District of Columbia to spend FY 2021 funds received from local tax revenues and other non-Federal sources in the amount and for the programs and activities provided in DC's FY 2021 Budget Act.

Extends the term of certain bankruptcy judgeships.

Allows the Federal Emergency Management Agency to access the entire DRF appropriation for fiscal year 2021 under the continuing resolution as necessary to respond to declared disasters.

Continues the authorization for the NFIP.

Extends funding for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program and the Child Care Entitlement to States program during the period of the continuing resolution. The extension will allow HHS to make first-quarter payments to States.

Extends the availability of funding for multiyear research grants supported by the National Institutes of Health that were interrupted in fiscal year 2020 by COVID-19 and would have expired at the end of the fiscal year.

Madam Speaker, our colleagues across the aisle have in both chambers have been obstructive, dilatory, petulantly uncooperative throughout the first session of the 117th Congress.

Nowhere was this more apparent than the refusal of the majority of J Republican members in the House voted 175-35 against H.R. 3233, legislation modeled after the 9/11 Commission establishing a National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act.

Madam Speaker, American families do not get to choose which bills to pay and which ones to ignore; neither can the United States Congress without putting the nation into default for the first time in its history.

Long ago, in 1789, Alexander Hamilton, the nation's first and greatest Treasury Secretary, understood that the path to American prosperity and greatness lay in its creditworthiness which provided the affordable access to capital needed to fund internal improvements and economic growth.

The nation's creditworthiness was one of its most important national assets and according to Hamilton: ``the proper funding of the present debt, will render it a national blessing.''

But to maintain this blessing, or to ``render public credit immortal,'' Hamilton understood that it was necessary that: ``the creation of debt should always be accompanied with the means of extinguishment.''

In other words, to retain and enjoy the prosperity that flows from good credit, it is necessary for a nation to pay its bills.

To preserve the sanctity of the full faith and credit of the United States, protect American jobs and businesses of all sizes, and ensure the continued growth of the economy, I strongly support the provision in the bill before extending the public debt limit to December 16, 2021.

Madam Speaker, I would also like to discuss an important topic that is closely related to this bill and that this House must address very soon--raising the debt ceiling.

Preserving the full faith and credit of the United States by raising to the debt limit to ensure that America pays the bills for past expenditures when they come due is not a partisan exercise but an act of patriotism, a recognition and embrace of the solemn obligation to preserve the unrivaled advantages that flow from the ability provided in the Article I, Section 8, clause 2 of the Constitution to ``borrow money on the credit of the United States.''

Long ago, in 1789, Alexander Hamilton, the nation's first and greatest Treasury Secretary, understood that the path to American prosperity and greatness lay in its creditworthiness which provided the affordable access to capital needed to fund internal improvements and economic growth.

It is because of the existence and wise use of the Borrowing Power that the nation was able to expand its reaches, resources, and riches by financing the Louisiana Purchase, the purchase of Alaska from Russia, to fund the investments to end the Great Depression, to finance the mobilization of resources needed in World War II to defeat fascism and save freedom in the nation and the world, to revive the economy after the catastrophic Great Recession of 2008, and most recently, to protect the public health and safety and restore the economy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This is why the ability to borrow money on the credit of the United States to finance its growth and protect its people and interests is essential to the national security and led Hamilton to proclaim that ``the proper funding of the present debt, will render it a national blessing.''

But to maintain this blessing, or to ``render public credit immortal,'' Hamilton understood that it was necessary that: ``the creation of debt should always be accompanied with the means of extinguishment.''

In other words, to retain and enjoy the prosperity that flows from good credit, it is necessary for a nation to pay its bills.

The United States has never defaulted on the payment of any debt incurred, and because of the size and strength of its economic and unmatched creditworthiness, is able to borrow on the lowest and most favorable terms of any nation or entity in the history of the world.

So secure and reliable is a bond issues by the Department of Treasury that the Unites States is the preferred haven for investments of foreign governments, corporations, and sovereign wealth funds.

The interest rate charged the federal government of the United States is the base for which every rate, from the prime rate charged the richest corporation to rates charged small business on purchases to the mortgages rates and students loans taken out by consumers.

If you raise the cost of borrowing for the government of the United States, you set off a chain reaction of increased interest rates for every other borrower in the United States and around the world.

This is why leading public finance experts and agencies, like Moody's Chief Economist Mark Zandi, have said it would be ``cataclysmic'' for the United States to default on its loan obligations.

Republicans know the debt ceiling needs to be raised; in 2019 during the Trump Administration, the Republican Senate Majority Leader marshalled Senate Republicans to vote to raise the debt ceiling, saying: ``We raised the debt ceiling because America can't default[,] that would be a disaster.''

Madam Speaker, this debate over extending the debt limit is not about restraining future spending, it is about paying the bills piled up already under both Republican and Democratic administrations.

The question of raising the national debt limit does not depend on how one feels about the Build Back Better agenda, as wildly popular as it is among all Americans, Democrats, Independents, and Republicans included.

It is instead about preserving the singular asset of the United States, its enviable and unrivaled creditworthiness, to finance future investments beneficial to the national interest, like the provision of free college for two years, or $2 billion investment to reduce violence in communities approved by the Committee on the Judiciary, or investments to preserve and strengthen Medicaid expansion programs, or extend broadband to underserved rural and urban areas, an action that will be as life-changing as the rural electrification program was in the 1930s.

Madam Speaker, if our friends across the aisle really want to shrink the deficit, reduce the national debt, practice fiscal responsibility, and bring about sustained economic growth and prosperity, there is a much better, easier, and more certain way to achieve these goals than by tampering with the U.S. Constitution.

The easier and better way is for the American people to keep a Democrat in the White House and place Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.

In the 1990s under the leadership of President Clinton the budget was balanced for four consecutive years, the national debt was paid down, the national debt, 23 million new jobs were created, and projected surpluses exceeded $5 trillion.

Under President Obama the financial crisis and economic meltdown inherited from his Republican predecessor was ended, the annual deficit was reduced by 67 percent, the auto industry was saved from collapse, and 15 million jobs were created.

In contrast, under every Republican administration since President Reagan the size of the deficit bequeathed to his successor was substantially larger than the deficit he inherited, a major economic recession occurred, and economic growth was lower than it was at the beginning of his administration.

To preserve the sanctity of the full faith and credit of the United States, protect American jobs and businesses of all sizes, and ensure the continued growth of the economy, raised.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 473 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Reschenthaler), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Madam Speaker, today, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 473, providing for consideration of H.R. 256, to repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force against Iraq resolution of 2002, under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and one motion to recommit.

The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 1187, the Corporate Governance Improvement and Investor Protection Act, under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Financial Services, makes in order 10 amendments, provides en bloc authority to the chair of the Committee on Financial Services, and provides for one motion to recommit.

The rule provides that the provisions of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act shall not apply to H.J. Res. 46. The rule also deems passage of H. Res. 467.

Finally, the rule provides the majority leader or his designee the ability to en bloc requested roll call votes on suspension bills considered on June 14 or June 15. This authority lasts through June 17.

Madam Speaker, there are two critically important measures contained in this rule.

H.R. 1187 will build on landmark reforms like the Dodd-Frank Act and Sarbanes-Oxley Act. It will help hold corporations accountable, help investors make informed decisions, and build a more sustainable and equitable economic recovery. These improvements are badly needed, especially at a time when we are seeing a new era of sustainable investors.

I want to discuss one bill in particular here today, Madam Speaker, a bill that was authored by the distinguished Chair, Congresswoman Barbara Lee from California, because this Congress is doing something extraordinary.

Nearly 20 years after we passed a measure to address the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and 10 years after the conflict in Iraq officially ended, we are reasserting our constitutional responsibility over matters of war and peace by finally repealing the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force.

This isn't an arcane legislative maneuver or simply some rhetorical exercise. This AUMF has been used over and over again to expand the mission and range of targets of U.S. military operations in Iraq never imagined when it was passed.

In fact, President Trump misused it as recently as last January to justify the strike that killed Iranian General Qasem Soleimani. The impacts of that decision dramatically escalated tensions between the United States and Iran and throughout the region, tensions that persist to this very day.

Madam Speaker, the process that we are starting here today with H.R. 256 provides a roadmap for Congress to get off the sidelines and to stop abdicating its constitutional responsibility to debate matters of war and peace.

That is what our Founders intended. They knew that decisions of such magnitude should not be made in a vacuum solely by a President. That is why the Constitution makes the President Commander in Chief but gives only Congress the power to declare war.

It is no secret that for a long time there were Members on both sides of the aisle who preferred to skirt that responsibility. They left such consequential decisions to whoever sat at 1600

Pennsylvania Avenue, Republican or Democrat.

But each of us was elected and sent here to do more than just make the easy calls. We were sent here to make tough decisions, especially when it involves sending our uniformed men and women, the people we represent, into harm's way and shoveling billions upon billions of taxpayer dollars overseas.

A growing number of Members, both Democrats and Republicans, have been working together to reclaim our Article I powers. There is now a bipartisan, bicameral consensus that we not only have to end endless wars, but we have to reexamine the shrinking congressional authority and the expanding executive powers that get us into global conflicts in the first place and, like inertia, keep us there for decades.

The Rules Committee has been working with the House Foreign Affairs Committee to do just that because everything has changed since Congress enacted the original War Powers Resolution over President Nixon's veto more than 50 years ago.

When we fight, how we fight, and why we fight, these are big issues that merit our most engaged attention and resolve. We have a responsibility to make sure that these laws and authorities work in the modern age.

I want to thank, in particular, Ranking Member Cole on the Rules Committee for working with me in this effort. He has been pushing to reclaim Congress' Article I responsibilities, no matter which party controls Congress or who sits in the White House. I know that sometimes it has been a lonely journey, but he has never stopped fighting because it is the right thing to do for this country and for this institution.

I also want to thank Chairman Meeks and Ranking Member McCaul for working with us on this bipartisan effort.

Again, I want to thank Congresswoman Barbara Lee for being consistent and never giving up in her effort not only to end endless wars but to make sure that Congress lives up to its constitutional responsibilities.

I am grateful that we also have a President in office today who supports reevaluating executive war powers. I have to be honest, Madam Speaker, I never thought I would see that day. But President Biden spent decades in the Senate grappling with the limitations of the War Powers Resolution, and he has a record of looking for ways to change it.

This opportunity is like lightning in a bottle. We have a coalition in Congress trying to get this done, and now the missing piece, a President in the Oval Office with the political will to take this on, is hopefully now falling into place.

I encourage all of my colleagues to join us in seizing this moment. Let's make the repeal of the 2002 AUMF the first step in not only repealing and reforming outdated AUMFs but reimagining the War Powers Resolution for the modern age.

President Johnson once said that it is damn easy to get into a war, but it is awfully hard to get out of one. We are here today because of the truth of that statement.

It should never be that Congress, and the people we represent, are sidelined on the life-or-death questions of when to go to war and when to come home.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I include in the Record a June 1 Newsweek article titled ``Congress Has a Chance To Reclaim Its War Powers.''

[June 1, 2021]

Congress Has a Chance To Reclaim Its War Powers

(By Dan Caldwell)

In response to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, then-President

George W. Bush signed into law the 2001 Authorization for Use

of Military Force to provide the legal authority to pursue

and punish those responsible. The following year, the 2002

AUMF was passed to authorize the ill-conceived invasion of

Iraq and the overthrow of dictator Saddam Hussein.

Over the last 20 years, both laws have been used to justify

military actions disconnected from their original intent.

These laws--unmodified since their original passage--have

sanctioned combat operations in at least 19 countries.

Successive congresses have abdicated their constitutionally

prescribed role in foreign

policy, allowing four presidential administrations to exploit

the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs and stretch their Article II

authorities. Multiple military conflicts have been expanded

or initiated with minimal congressional oversight and debate.

It is past time for Congress to firmly reassert its role in

shaping U.S. foreign policy. After 20 years of endless war,

it owes its constituents--including our men and women in

uniform--a better foreign policy that prioritizes keeping

Americans safe. Rather than abdicating its solemn duties,

Congress must inquire, ``Why, at what cost, and toward what

end?'' are young American servicemembers sent to fight and

die for ill-premised objectives that are fundamentally

disconnected from vital national interests. Further evasion

of these hard questions cheapens the ``true faith and

allegiance'' they swore to uphold when elected to office.

Over 7,000 Americans have lost their lives and tens of

thousands more wounded in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and

Africa. These conflicts have cost the American taxpayer over

$6.4 trillion dollars--a number that will surely continue to

grow as wars drag on and the cost of caring for veterans of

these wars is tallied.

Congress has several ways it can help bring an end to our

endless wars while helping shape a better foreign policy.

First, in the coming months the House of Representatives

will likely have an opportunity to repeal the 2002 AUMF by

passing legislation introduced by Representative Barbara Lee

(D-Calif.)--a stalwart champion of Congress reclaiming its

powers in matters of war and peace. A similar bill has been

introduced in the Senate by Senators Todd Young (R-Ind.) and

Tim Kaine (D-Va.), which has been endorsed by the Biden

administration. Additional legislation repealing the outdated

1957 and 1991 AUMFs has been introduced by Representatives

Peter Meijer (R-Mich.) and Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.).

Passage of these bipartisan bills should be a no-brainer for

a Congress bitterly divided on other issues and an important

first step toward Congress reclaiming its most important

prerogative.

Congress should also consider revision--or outright

repeal--of the 2001 AUMF. More than the 2002 AUMF, this law

has been stretched to justify conflicts far afield from its

original intent of authorizing operations against Al-Qaeda

and the Taliban in Afghanistan after 9/11. It is worth

acknowledging that the underlying purpose of the 2001 AUMF

has been satisfied: Osama bin Laden is dead, Al-Qaeda has

been decimated and the Taliban severely punished. And despite

never being amended, this authorization has been cited to

account for operations against groups that didn't even exist

on 9/11 in places such as Somalia and Libya.

If Congress repeals the 2001 AUMF, the executive branch

still has the authority to authorize military operations to

repel imminent attacks and to engage in self-defense

(although Congress should take steps to ensure that this

authority isn't stretched too far, as it was by President Joe

Biden's recent airstrikes in Syria). If Congress identifies a

need to replace the 2001 AUMF, it should authorize force

against clear targets given specified objectives, geographic

boundaries and clear sunsets.

Congress should also use its power of the purse to assert

its authority in foreign policy. This is in many ways the

most effective tool Congress has and it has been used

successfully in the past to end American involvement in

conflicts, including Vietnam.

Repealing outdated AUMFs and helping end our forever wars

around the globe would enjoy broad support from the American

people. Poll after poll has shown a majority of Americans

want an end to our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, while also

supporting Congress playing a greater role in authorizing

military conflicts abroad.

I am proud to have deployed to Iraq as a U.S. Marine. Many

of those I served with are still in uniform and are still

deploying to war zones on a regular basis, even if they

harbor doubts about the necessity of those conflicts.

Congress owes it to them to step up and do its job by

reasserting itself in matters of war and peace. Failing to do

so dishonors those who have and who continue to serve

overseas in the wars that have dragged on in part due to

congressional inaction.

Madam Speaker, over the last 20 years, both the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs have been used to justify military actions disconnected from their original intent.

I want to say to my colleague from Pennsylvania that we are grateful for his service to our country. But the fact is that we are still operating under an AUMF that we passed almost 20 years ago, almost two decades ago.

When we were debating that AUMF--an AUMF that I voted against--there is no way that we would have anticipated what the realities are now. The notion that somehow we can't, as a body, come together and revisit these AUMFs on a regular basis, to me, is beyond comprehension.

We owe it to the men and women who serve our country in our Armed Forces to make sure that we are doing our due diligence.

The President has multiple authorities, by the way, to be able to respond to any threats against individual U.S. citizens almost anywhere in the world. But if people are trying to use this AUMF as a way to potentially have a war with Iran, let me just say this: If that is what anybody's goal is, you better damn well come back to Congress and have a debate, and people ought to be able to vote yes or no on it.

Many of us are concerned that these lingering AUMFs are going to be misconstrued and misinterpreted and misused.

I include in the Record a Statement of Administration Policy. President Biden supports the Lee bill. He doesn't see any need to have a continuation of the 2002 AUMF. If the President of the United States doesn't see a need to continue it, I don't know why we feel we have to continue something that is clearly outdated.

Statement of Administration Policy

h.r. 256--repeal of authorization for use of military force--against

iraq resolution of 2002--rep. lee, d-ca with 134 co-sponsors

The Administration supports House passage of H.R. 256, to

repeal the Authorization for Use of of Military Force Against

Iraq Resolution of 2002 (``2002 AUMF''). This bipartisan

legislation would terminate the October 16, 2002, statutory

authorization for the use of military force against Iraq.

The Administration supports the repeal of the 2002 AUMF, as

the United States has no ongoing military activities that

rely solely on the 2002 AUMF as a domestic legal basis, and

repeal of the 2002 AUMF would likely have minimal impact on

current military operations. Furthermore, the President is

committed to working with the Congress to ensure that

outdated authorizations for the use of military force are

replaced with a narrow and specific framework appropriate to

ensure that we can continue to protect Americans from

terrorist threats.

In working with the Congress on repealing and replacing

other existing authorizations of military force, the

Administration seeks to ensure that the Congress has a clear

and thorough understanding of the effect of any such action

and of the threats facing U.S. forces, personnel, and

interests around the world. As the Administration works with

the Congress to reform AUMFs, it will be critical to maintain

the clear authority to address threats to the United States'

national interests with appropriately decisive and effective

military action.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, what a crock. I mean, it is hard to hear anybody on the other side of the aisle talk about government shutdowns. I remember when they lost this place 3 years ago. What did they do? They left us with a government shutdown. First time ever in history, the Republican majority did that.

The gentleman is saying we are not going to vote on this stuff. Maybe he doesn't understand the legislative process. Let me remind everybody that we have to vote on every single cent that we put forward here.

We have an appropriations process. Maybe the gentleman doesn't understand that. But every cent that we spend has to be voted on by people in this Chamber. So nobody is not going to vote on anything.

Let me just put this in perspective. Yes, the President's budget was late, and given the timing of the President's budget, the Appropriations Committee needs to get started to start doing their work, unless my friends don't want the Appropriations Committee to do their work. Deeming a top-line number for appropriators is a housekeeping item that we can take care of so they can move forward, and we can then turn our attention to a budget resolution and enacting the transformational policies included in the President's American Jobs Plan and American Families Plan.

Here's the thing that really gets me when I hear people have meltdowns on the floor. This process has been used by Republicans and Democrats alike in order to allow appropriators to get started on their work. Ever since the first deeming resolution in fiscal year 1999, when Republicans were in charge, overall House Republican majorities used deemers nine times, including for fiscal years 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2019. Boy, how convenient it is to forget about all of that. But, then, again, facts don't seem to matter.

Just one other thing. When the gentleman used the term ``big lie,'' I don't want to be lectured by anybody about a big lie, especially by individuals who voted deliberately to overturn the will of the American people, to undermine our democracy. I will not be lectured to by anybody on that matter.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I don't even know what to say. The response to the situation at our border and to the people who are fleeing their countries in Central America to try to seek refugee in the United States, the response that the Republicans just came up with basically is saying we are going to withhold any money for Vice President Harris' travel budget unless she goes to the border and does a photo op.

We are supposed to be a serious legislative body. We are supposed to be the most serious, most deliberative legislative body in the world, and my friends say we are going to withhold her travel budget unless she goes to the border and does a photo op. That is what this is.

Never mind that Vice President Harris represented California as a United States Senator, which is a border State. Never mind that she just went to Central America because people are coming to our border from places like El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala. Never mind she went to some of these countries where people are fleeing so we can try to figure out how to deal with this issue.

My Republican friends have brought to the House floor a bill that basically says: You know what? Our solution is you either go and do a photo op at the border or we are going to withhold your travel budget.

I mean, really? That is a serious legislative proposal?

I don't even know how to respond to that, other than to say that, you could have come up with something better. This isn't even worth any more of my time talking about it.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The gentleman can come and huff and puff all he wants on the House floor, but, again, I remind people that the solution that is being put forward by my Republican friends is to withhold the Vice President's travel budget until she does a photo op. I think this is beneath, quite frankly, the dignity of this legislative body.

I would also say to the gentleman that what the Vice President was trying to do was get at the source of migration, of people coming to our border, trying to solve the problem. She was spending her time trying to figure out how to solve the problem, not try to figure out how to overturn the last election; not trying to figure out how to reinstate the last President who lost the election not only fair and square, but by a pretty big margin, but actually trying to solve problems.

It is hard to sit here and listen to some of the things we have listened to here today and then be told: Oh, here is our proposal.

I mean, come on. Give me a break.

Let's get back to trying to figure out to solve problems rather than try to score political points. And if you are going to try to score political points, certainly you can come up with a better idea than this.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

I don't know what the gentleman was talking about, about woke yuppies and all this other kind of stuff he was talking about here today, but Democrats actually believe in science. We believe that climate change is real. We believe that we ought to have some accountability, especially in the corporate world, as to what they are doing and how they are reporting their actions.

I find this so concerning that we can't even have a debate on what, in fact, the underlying legislation is. I think the bill that Congresswoman Waters has brought to the floor is a commonsense bill that I hope even some Republicans might support.

I would also say that the other piece of legislation that we were talking about here today is Barbara Lee's bill to repeal the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force. Many of us have been urging that we repeal that 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force for quite a while now. It has passed the House and it has passed committee. Yet here we are again, and now we have a President of the United States that says that he no longer wants that, that he actually supports what we are trying to do here. Yet we still have people on the House floor who say, no, we need to hold onto it, an Authorization for Use of Military Force that we passed almost 20 years ago that somehow is applicable today. That just doesn't make any sense to me.

People like Congresswoman Lee; Congressman Adam Smith; the late Republican Congressman, Walter Jones; and Congressman Tom Cole have talked about the need for us to reclaim our constitutional powers when it comes to committing American forces into harm's way.

Quite frankly, many of us have been raising this issue--didn't matter who was in the White House, whether it was a Democrat or a Republican-- because we think it is the right thing to do. We think somehow it is cowardice for Congress to just keep on kicking the can down the road to ignoring these important debates.

You have those debates, and if people decide to continue the same old, same old, fine. That is what the majority of people here vote for. If people decide to end it, that ought to be fine, too. That is what we are here for.

I think this institution would be better served if we took our constitutional responsibilities with regard to war and peace more seriously.

Today, I hope we will pass this rule and we will then pass the Lee bill. But it isn't the end of our work. We are going to need to continue to review and repeal and reform outdated Authorizations for Use of Military Force, and we need to reimagine the broader issues embedded in the War Powers Resolution, because never again should we acquiesce and allow Congress to sit on the sidelines as wars are crafted and carried out by the White House, wars that never end, wars that sacrifice lives and sacrifice treasure.

Let's respect our troops. Let's respect their families. Let's respect this institution. Let's finally get back to doing our jobs, taking responsibility and voting on issues of war and peace. And let's start today by supporting this rule and the underlying measures.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Reschenthaler is as follows:

Amendment to House Resolution 473

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec. 9. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the

House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the

bill (H.R. 3403) to limit travel by the Vice President until

after certain activities are undertaken with respect to the

southwest border, and for other purposes. All points of order

against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall

be considered as read. All points of order against provisions

in the bill are waived. The previous question shall be

considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment

thereto to final passage without intervening motion except:

(1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the

chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on

Oversight and Reform; and (2) one motion to recommit.

Sec. 10. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the

consideration of H.R. 3403.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Madam Speaker, I rise to support the continuing resolution, which extends government funding at current levels until we pass a full appropriations package for the next fiscal year.

It is my strong hope that this short-term extension will be the last one and that my colleagues across the aisle will acknowledge our solemn duty to exercise the power of the purse.

A continuing resolution that lasts a full year does not serve the American people. As the chair of the Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, I can attest that the investments in the House interior bill would benefit all of our constituents, for those of us on both sides of the aisle.

The bill makes long-overdue investments to protect human health, to fight the climate emergency, and to meet our trust obligations to Tribal nations. It provides critical resources to rebuild the Federal workforce so that these agencies can meet their missions and better serve the public.

Failing to complete a full-year bill means no additional investments in the EPA to research and develop standards for harmful pollutants like PFAS, no further investments in domestic renewable energy, and insufficient resources for the healthcare of nearly 2.2 million American Indians and Alaska Natives.

Regardless of whether we pass a full-year bill, we can be certain that millions of Americans will be exposed to pollution, that healthcare costs will rise, and that our window for mitigating climate change will shrink.

To ignore these threats is not in the Nation's best interest, nor any of ours. We were sent to Congress to improve the lives and livelihoods of our constituents.

Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this bill, but I encourage my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to finish the bill.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from The Ad Hoc Group for Medical Research.

The Ad Hoc Group

for Medical Research,

November 15, 2021.

Hon. Rosa DeLauro,

Chair, Committee on Appropriations,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Hon. Kay Granger,

Ranking Member, Committee on Appropriations,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Hon. Patrick Leahy,

Chair, Committee on Appropriations,

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Hon. Richard Shelby,

Vice Chair, Committee on Appropriations,

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairwoman DeLauro, Chairman Leahy, Ranking Member

Granger, and Vice Chairman Shelby: Thank you for your past

leadership in championing sustained, real growth in medical

research funding. As Congress begins to draft a final fiscal

year (FY) 2022 spending package, the 314 undersigned members

of the Ad Hoc Group for Medical Research urge you to invest

robustly in agencies and programs to improve the nation's

health and well-being, including base funding for the

National Institutes of Health (NIH), as a key national

priority and to finalize the appropriations process as

expeditiously as possible. The Ad Hoc Group for Medical

Research is a coalition of patient and voluntary health

groups, medical and scientific societies, academic and

research organizations, and industry, dedicated to enhancing

the federal investment in biomedical, behavioral, social, and

population-based research supported by the NIH.

We greatly appreciate that both the House-passed (H.R.

4502) and Senate draft Labor-HHS-Education spending bills

include strong increases for the NIH base in FY 2022, which

would provide greater hope and opportunity for every patient

awaiting a cure, every researcher working toward the next

breakthrough, and every aspiring scientist considering a

career in the lab. To maximize the potential of medical

research to make rapid progress toward these goals, we urge

you to provide at least $46.4 billion for NIH's base, as

included in the House-passed bill. Continuing the momentum of

the prior six years of bipartisan support for meaningful

funding growth in the NIH's existing institutes and centers

is key to ensuring that the nation can continue to accelerate

the development of life-changing cures, pioneering treatments

and diagnostics, and innovative preventive strategies.

Additionally, we appreciate that both bills ensure that the

new investment for the proposed Advanced Research Projects

Agency for Health (ARPA-H) supplements, rather than

supplants, the NIH's base. While complementary, NIH and ARPA-

H have distinct and important missions. As such, investment

in ARPA-H must not come at the expense of the NIH base.

Instead, to fully realize the benefits of the envisioned new

entity while simultaneously allowing NIH to keep pace with

discovery, an FY 2022 appropriation of at least $46.4 billion

for NIH's base budget is needed. Prioritizing strong

investments for foundational research discoveries funded by

the NIH will be critical to the success of the visionary new

research initiative, particularly as it builds its

operational capacity in its inaugural year and beyond.

Likewise, avoiding further delays in finalizing funding

determinations will enable both ARPA-Hand NIH's planned and

existing programs to be maximally efficient and strategic in

their work in FY 2022.

To that end, our organizations strongly support an approach

to the final FY 2022 spending package that avoids additional

CRs past December. Aside from the budget implications, CRs

create inefficiencies and add uncertainty to a system that is

already

under stress with the continued reverberations of the ongoing

COVID-19 pandemic. We strongly urge you to work swiftly in

securing bipartisan, bicameral agreement on topline

discretionary spending allocations and to ensure any final

budget agreement reflects a strong commitment to the nation's

health.

Once again, we commend you for continuing to recognize the

incomparable value of the federal investment in the NIH, and

we look forward to working with you to secure $46.4 billion

for the agency's base in FY 2022, in addition to funding you

provide for ARPA-H.

Sincerely,

314 Signatories as of November 15, 2021

Academic Consortium for Integrative Medicine & Health,

Academic Pediatric Association, Academy for Eating Disorders,

Academy for Professionalism in Health Care, Academy for

Radiology & Biomedical Imaging Research, ACT for NIH,

AdventHealth, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Alliance

for Academic Internal Medicine (AAIM), Alliance for Aging

Research, ALS Association, Alzheimer's Association and

Alzheimer's Impact Movement, Alzheimer's Foundation of

America, American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (AAAP),

American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, American

Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, American Academy

of Neurology, American Academy of Pediatrics, American

Academy of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation.

American Academy of Sleep Medicine, American Association

for Anatomy, American Association for Cancer Research,

American Association for Dental, Oral, and Craniofacial

Research, American Association for the Advancement of

Science, American Association for the Study of Liver

Diseases, American Association of Chairs of Departments of

Psychiatry, American Association of Colleges of Nursing,

American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine,

American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy, American

Association of Directors of Psychiatry Residency Training,

American Association of Immunologists, American Association

of Neurological Surgeons, American Association of

Neuromuscular & Electrodiagnostic Medicine, American

Association of Physicists in Medicine, American Association

of Veterinary Medical Colleges, American Brain Coalition,

American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American

College of Academic Addiction Medicine (ACAAM), American

College of Cardiology.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists,

American College of Physicians, American College of

Radiology, American College of Surgeons, American Council on

Education, American Gastroenterological Association American

Geriatrics Society, American Headache Society, American

Institute for Cancer Research, American Institute for Medical

& Biomedical Engineering, American Institute of Ultrasound in

Medicine, American Liver Foundation, American Lung

Association, American Massage Therapy Association, American

Pediatric Society, American Physiological Society, American

Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association,

American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology,

American Society for Investigative Pathology.

American Society for Microbiology, American Society for

Nutrition, American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental

Therapeutics, American Society for Reproductive Medicine

(ASRM), American Society for Virology, American Society of

Anesthesiologists, American Society of Hematology, American

Society of Human Genetics, American Society of Nephrology,

American Society of Neuroradiology, American Society of

Pediatric Nephrology, American Society of Radiologic

Technologists, American Surgical Association, American

Thoracic Society, American Urogynecologic Society, American

Urological Association, Anxiety and Depression Association of

America, Associated Medical Schools of New York.

Association for Anatomy, Cell Biology and Neurobiology

Chairs (AACBNC), Association for Clinical and Translational

Science, Association for Clinical Oncology, Association for

Prevention Teaching and Research, Association for

Psychological Science, Association for Research in Vision and

Ophthalmology (ARVO), Association of Academic Health Centers

(AAHC), Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries,

Association of Academic Physiatrists.

Association of American Cancer Institutes, Association of

American Medical Colleges, Association of American

Universities, Association of Bioethics Program Directors,

Association of Chairs of Departments of Physiology,

Association of Independent Research Institutes, Association

of Medical and Graduate Departments of Biochemistry (AMGDB),

Association of Medical School Pediatric Department Chairs,

Association of Minority Health Professions Schools,

Association of Pathology Chairs, Association of Population

Centers, Association of Psychologists in Academic Health

Centers, Association of Public and Land-grant Universities,

Association of Schools and Colleges of Optometry (ASCO),

Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health,

Association of University Professors of Neurology,

Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology,

Association of University Radiologists, Atrium Health, Autism

Speaks.

AVAC (AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition), Barnes-Jewish

Hospital, Bassett Healthcare Network, Biophysical Society,

BJC HealthCare, Boston Medical Center, Boston University,

Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research, Brown

University, Carle Illinois College of Medicine, Case Western

Reserve University, CDH International, Cedars-Sinai, Child

Neurology Foundation, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta,

Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Children's Hospital of

Philadelphia, Children's Mercy Kansas City,

Cholangiocarcinoma Foundation, ChristianaCare.

Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation, Clinical Research

Forum, Coalition for Clinical and Translational Science,

Coalition for the Life Sciences, College on Problems of Drug

Dependence, Columbia University, COMBINEDBrain, Conference of

Boston Teaching Hospitals, Congress of Neurological Surgeons,

Consortium of Social Science Associations, Cooley's Anemia

Foundation, Coriell Institute for Medical Research, Cornell

University, Council of University Directors of Clinical

Psychology, Council on Social Work Education, Crohn's &

Colitis Foundation, CURE Epilepsy, Cystic Fibrosis

Foundation, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Dartmouth-Hitchcock

Health.

Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance, Digestive Disease

National Coalition, Dravet Syndrome Foundation, Drexel

University, Duke Health, Duke University, Dystonia Medical

Research Foundation, East Carolina University, ECAN

Esophageal Cancer Action Network, Emory University, Endocrine

Society, Epilepsy Foundation, Federation of American

Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB), Federation of

Associations in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Fight

Colorectal Cancer, Foundation for Sarcoidosis Research, Fox

Chase Cancer Center, Friends of the National Institute on

Drug Abuse, GBSICIDP Foundation International, Global Health

Technologies Coalition.

Global Liver Institute, Harvard University, HealthyWomen,

Henry Ford Health System, HIV Medicine Association, Hope For

Stomach Cancer, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai,

Indiana University, Indiana University Health, Infectious

Diseases Society of America, Initiative to End Alzheimer's

Disease Board of Visitors, International Foundation for

Gastrointestinal Disorders, International Society for Stem

Cell Research (ISSCR), Interstitial Cystitis Association,

JDRF, Jeffrey Modell Foundation, John & Amy Mewhiney Cancer

Foundation, Johns Hopkins University and Medicine, Joslin

Diabetes Center, KidneyCAN.

Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University, Lewy

Body Dementia Association, LGS Foundation, Lupus Foundation

of America, Lymphatic Education & Research Network, Magee-

Womens Research Institute and Foundation, March of Dimes,

Mass General Brigham, Medical College of Wisconsin, Medical

Image Perception Society, Medical Library Association,

Memorial Sloan Kettering, MemorialCare Health System,

Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation, METAvivor,

Michelson Center for Public Policy, Michelson Medical

Research Foundation, Michigan State University, Moffitt

Cancer Center, National Alliance for Eye and Vision Research.

National Alopecia Areata Foundation, National Association

for Biomedical Research, National Eczema Association,

National Fragile X Foundation, National Kidney Foundation,

National Pancreas Foundation, NephCure Kidney International,

New York Medical College, New York University, North American

Vascular Biology Organization, Northeastern University,

Nutrition & Medical Foods Coalition, NYU Langone Health,

Oakland University, Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation,

Pancreatic Cancer Action Network, Patient Services, Inc.,

Pediatric Policy Council, Penn State University, Personalized

Medicine Coalition.

Population Association of America, Project Sleep, Prostate

Cancer Foundation, Pulmonary Fibrosis Foundation, Pulmonary

Hypertension Association, Radiological Society of North

America (RSNA), Recurrent Pregnancy Loss Association,

Research!America, RESOLVE: The National Infertility

Association, Restless Legs Syndrome Foundation, Rosalind

Franklin University of Medicine and Science, RTI

International, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey,

Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute,

Scleroderma Foundation, Sjogren's Foundation, Sleep Research

Society, Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM),

Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine.

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Society for

Neuroscience, Society for Pediatric Radiology, Society for

Pediatric Research, Society for Reproductive Endocrinology

and Infertility, Society for Reproductive Investigation,

Society for Women's Health Research, Society of Academic

Associations of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine

(SAAAPM), Society of Behavioral Medicine, Society of General

Internal Medicine, Society of Gynecologic Oncology, Society

of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Society of

Skeletal Radiology, Society of Surgical Chairs, Society of

Toxicology (SOT), Society of University Surgeons, St. Louis

Children's Hospital, Stanford University, Stony Brook

University, Syngap1 Foundation.

Temple University, Texas A&M Health, The American College

of Rheumatology, The American Society for Transplantation and

Cellular Therapy, The Gerontological Society of America, The

Jackson Laboratory, The Maya's Wings Foundation, The Michael

J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research, The Ohio State

University Wexner Medical Center, The State University of New

York,

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, The

University of North Carolina System, The University of Texas,

Southwestern Medical Center, Triage Cancer, TSC Alliance,

Tulane University School of Medicine, UC San Diego, UCLA, UNC

Health and UNC School of Medicine, University of Arkansas for

Medical Sciences.

University of California, Irvine, University of Chicago

Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, University of

Colorado System, University of Connecticut, University of

Hawai'i System, University of Illinois College of Medicine,

University of Iowa, University of Maryland, Baltimore,

University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, University

of Michigan, University of Nebraska Medical Center,

University of Pennsylvania, University of Pittsburgh,

University of Pittsburgh Health Sciences, University of

Rochester, University of South Carolina, University of

Southern California, University of Washington, US Hereditary

Angioedema Association (HAEA).

USF Health Morsani College of Medicine, UVA Health,

Vanderbilt University, Vanderbilt University Medical Center,

Virginia Commonwealth University, Washington State

University, Washington University in St. Louis, West Virginia

University, Yale University.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 829, I call up the bill (H.R. 6119) making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2022, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise

and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, before I go any further, I would first like to take a moment to mourn the loss of Congresswoman Carrie Meek. She was an extraordinary force in the Congress and a pioneer who was never deterred by any challenge that came her way. I like to say that though she was unassuming and soft-spoken, she carried a big stick. That is evident in her enduring legacy today. I had the honor of serving together with Congresswoman Meek on the Appropriations Committee years ago, and I feel immensely privileged to have worked with her to help expand opportunity for all Americans. We all mourn her loss.

Madam Speaker, I will be frank. Instead of being here today discussing another continuing resolution, I wish that we were here to present a bipartisan, bicameral appropriations agreement. Continuing resolutions are not the way to govern. They are a short-term patch that leaves the American people behind. But we are here today because my colleagues across the aisle have refused time and time again to begin negotiations or even offer a proposal of their own for government funding that delivers for the American people.

House and Senate Democrats have put forward their proposals, but Republicans have not presented an offer of their own. There is not one piece of paper describing what Republicans want. It has been 30 days since I brought together a bipartisan, bicameral four-corners meeting on November 2, and to date we have not heard one word from them--not one word.

But now my Republican counterparts want more time--something that they have had since we came to this floor to pass the last funding extension 62 days ago, which means we now have no choice but to pursue a short-term extension. Make no mistake, Madam Speaker, a vote against this continuing resolution is a vote to shut the government down.

The legislation before us, the Further Extending Government Funding Act, continues government funding at current levels through February 18. It makes minimal changes to address the most urgent of needs during the period of the continuing resolution and provides $7 billion to continue supporting Afghanistan evacuees after the end of 20 years of war.

While I wish the February 18 end date were earlier--and I pursued earlier dates--I believe this agreement allows the appropriations process to move forward toward a final funding agreement that addresses the needs of the American people.

Let me be clear, working families, small businesses, veterans, and our military need the certainty that comes with passing omnibus funding legislation instead of short-term funding patches. Republicans must join us for bipartisan, bicameral negotiations to resolve our differences and keep government working for us all.

For our communities, we need an omnibus to create and sustain good- paying jobs, support small businesses, prevent future pandemics, and advance lifesaving medical research. We need an omnibus to strengthen public schools, protect our air and water, combat the opioid epidemic, and support core services such as food safety and consumer product inspections. Without an omnibus, investments in all these areas will be denied.

For our veterans, we need an omnibus to provide sufficient funding for veterans' benefits, reduce backlogs for veterans and their families, and meet the needs of the VA's healthcare system. Without an omnibus there will be a shortfall that will cause veterans not to receive their benefits in full.

For our national security, we need an omnibus to support defense readiness and modernization, secure our cyber infrastructure, and strengthen American leadership abroad. Without an omnibus, a pay raise for troops will not be funded while funds will be misdirected to a war we are no longer fighting.

As I said before, I wanted to be here today passing a bipartisan, bicameral appropriations agreement. Sadly, we are not. But as Republicans take the next 2\1/2\ months, Democrats remain ready, willing, and able to move this process forward. We are ready to go, but we need willing partners to put the American people first.

With a new deadline of February 18, it is long past time for our Republican colleagues to offer constructive proposals to address the critical issues facing the country by funding the Federal Government's important work. As the American people put their faith and trust in us, they deserve no less.

Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), who is the chairwoman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, and Related Agencies.

Madam Speaker, once again, the Republicans refuse to come to the table to negotiate, thereby jeopardizing benefits for our veterans and our national security. We can move if they come to the table.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies.

Madam Speaker, antiscience fearmongering about vaccines is wrong. Fears about government requirements for vaccines are flat-out silly. And the Republicans are prepared to shut down the government based on this. Incredible.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard), the chair of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), the chairwoman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), the chair of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense.

Madam Speaker, once again, it has been the Republicans' refusal to come to the table to negotiate that has stopped the process and forced us to do a short-term stopgap measure. We shouldn't be doing it, but Republicans need to come to the table.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), the chairman of the Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Ohio.

Madam Speaker, if the Republicans wanted to do something about our defense and our security in the military, they would move to work with us to pass the defense appropriations bill and the omnibus.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), the chair of the Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans' Affairs.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Florida.

Madam Speaker, I want to remind my colleague on the other side of the aisle that a continuing resolution is a cut to defense. If you come to the table, we will discuss it, then we can move forward on the defense of this Nation.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Maine (Ms. Pingree), the chair of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies.

Madam Speaker, I just want to remind the gentleman that antiscience fearmongering about vaccines is wrong. Science is on our side, and history is on our side. Vaccines work.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Quigley), the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cartwright), the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me just say to you that we have heard from a number of advocacy groups urging the Congress to move on taking up a full-year omnibus. Let me just tell you the groups that have written to us.

We are looking at the National Defense Industrial Association: On behalf of thousands of companies represented by the National Defense Industrial Association, we write to request the expedited completion of the defense appropriation bill.

We talk about the Association of American Universities: Urge you to reach a bipartisan agreement to complete the FY22 appropriations process before the end of the year.

The Aerospace Industries Association: Our essential partners are urging us to avoid a further CR beyond December 3, wanting us to come to the table in order to be able to have a full-year appropriations bill.

The Coalition for Health Funding, the same message to all of us: Relying on continuing resolutions would be a grave, missed opportunity to improve the lives of all Americans. A full-year appropriations bill.

The Ad Hoc Group for Medical Research telling us the very, very same thing: To maximize the potential of medical research, we need to move forward with a full-year bill.

The veterans organizations saying the same thing: Do not shortchange veterans and their benefits by holding back on a full-year appropriations bill.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record statements in support of the bill from a broad coalition of groups urging negotiations now, as well as letters from veterans' organizations and America's leading research universities.

Broad Coalition of Groups Urging Negotiations Now

A broad coalition of groups have joined Chair DeLauro and

Democratic Appropriators urging negotiations and agreement on

fiscal year 2022 appropriations bills. These organizations

include:

Ad Hoc Group for Medical Research

Our organizations strongly support an approach to the final

FY 2022 spending package that avoids additional CRs past

December. Aside from the budget implications, CRs create

inefficiencies and add uncertainty to a system that is

already under stress with the continued reverberations of the

ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We strongly urge you to work

swiftly in securing bipartisan, bicameral agreement on

topline discretionary spending allocations and to ensure any

final budget agreement reflects a strong commitment to the

nation's health.

Aerospace Industries Association

The United States aerospace and defense industries are an

essential partner with the federal government in an array of

efforts vital to our economy and our national security. Each

fall, that partnership is tested when those programs are

slowed down or deferred by the use of multiple continuing

resolutions (CR) to keep the government running . . . If

Congress fails to once again enact full-year appropriations

bills, or continues running the government into 2022 under

continuing resolutions, it will send the wrong signal to the

government's partners, like those in our industry. We count

on stable, reliable and adequate funding to support

the critical capabilities that we provide for all Americans.

American Association for Cancer Research

As the nation continues to combat the COVID-19 pandemic,

cancer has not stopped, and remains the second leading cause

of death in the United States. To better prevent, detect, and

treat cancers, Congress must act swiftly to increase

investments in cancer research and prevention. A full-year

continuing resolution or funding lapse would threaten our

nation's research enterprise and stall medical breakthroughs

that could benefit the lives of millions of patients with

cancer and survivors. The AACR urges congressional

negotiators to come to the table and agree to Fiscal Year

2022 allocations that would support robust and sustained

funding for cancer research and prevention.

Association of American Universities

Higher education, research, and innovation play integral

roles in our nation's competitiveness, security, health, and

ability to combat and overcome the pandemic. Our nation

cannot afford continued inaction on FY22 appropriations. In

the absence of final appropriations, federal agencies

postpone research award decisions and prepare for potential

lapses in funding. Continuing resolutions (CRs) slow the pace

of scientific innovation and create funding uncertainty for

researchers and students. It is vital that Congress complete

appropriations this year and avoid serial stop-gap measures

and a yearlong CR.

Coalition on Human Needs

The nation's recovery depends on strengthening a host of

domestic programs that have been allowed to shrink for years,

not just to get to where they had been before, but to respond

to needs far greater because of the pandemic and its global

economic dislocations. A long-term continuing resolution

would be a severe failure to address these needs. We strongly

urge you to enact omnibus appropriations legislation

including all twelve bills as soon as possible.

Joint Coalition of the Campaign to Invest in American's Workforce, the

Coalition for Health Funding, the Coalition on Human Needs, and the

Committee for Education Funding

The bill passed by the House this summer and the bill

proposed by the Senate Appropriations Committee this fall

provide vital increased funding for the programs and services

that have a profound impact on health and well-being, child

development, educational and skills attainment, employment,

and productivity. Failing to enact the FY 2022 bill and

relying on continuing resolutions (CRs) would be a grave

missed opportunity to improve the lives of all Americans.

National Defense Industrial Association

We cannot stress enough the importance of the defense

appropriations bill to our national security and to a healthy

defense industrial base. The limbo caused under CRs wastes

precious time and money our nation cannot recover. Delayed

new starts and initiatives place a strain on companies and

their workforce, particularly as they recalibrate operations

to a post-pandemic normal. Our nation's competitors face no

similar challenges putting us at a competitive disadvantage,

particularly with emerging technologies, and place our supply

chains at increasing risk, something we cannot afford after

the nearly two years of pandemic impacts.

Veterans Service Organizations, including the American Legion and the

Veterans of Foreign Wars

A full-year continuing resolution could result in an

estimated $7 billion shortfall in funding for mandatory

compensation and pension benefits, in large part due to an

increased number of benefit claims resulting from

congressional approval of new diseases related to Agent

Orange exposure for Vietnam veterans . . . we call on you to

reject consideration of a full-year continuing resolution

that would reduce veterans' funding below what has already

been approved in an overwhelming bipartisan vote.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the majority leader of the House of Representatives.

Madam Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Madam Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my good friend, Chairman Meeks. We work well together. When we disagree, we do it civilly, and I think that is the way this body should operate. But I do disagree on this one.

I have said many times before that war should not be on autopilot. I do think this is an outdated AUMF, and I do believe that Congress needs to reclaim its war powers under Article I of the Constitution.

I also share the desire to repeal the 2002 AUMF, as well as the 2001 AUMF, but that must be part of a serious process to provide clear, updated authorities against the terrorists who still plot to kill Americans at home and abroad. I still hope to work toward that end with my respected friend, Chairman Meeks, but a repeal and replacement should be simultaneous.

It is confusing to me that we are jamming through a standalone repeal without basic due diligence; without consulting the State Department, the Defense Department, or the intelligence community; without consulting the Government of Iraq and our coalition partners and allies.

In the 3 months since I made that complaint at our markup, the majority still has not scheduled a single briefing. This, in my judgment, is not a serious legislative process for the most serious issues that we face, and that is war and peace.

This feels like yet another political effort to undo one of President Trump's boldest counterterrorism successes: using the 2002 AUMF to remove Qasem Soleimani from the battlefield.

Soleimani was Iran's mastermind of terror for decades. He was responsible for the death of more than 600 Americans and wounded thousands more. He orchestrated the attack on our Baghdad Embassy. He plotted to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador on American soil here in D.C. He oversaw Iran's support for Assad, who killed hundreds of thousands in Syria. In short, America and the world are much safer with Qasem Soleimani gone.

While the 2002 AUMF was largely about Saddam Hussein, it also clearly

addressed the terrorist threats in and emanating from Iraq. All prior administrations, Republican and Democrat, have used it for that purpose.

Today, the biggest threat in Iraq is not Saddam Hussein. We can all recognize that. But it is the Iran-sponsored terrorist groups attacking our diplomats, our soldiers, our embassy, and our citizens. They cannot be targeted using the 2001 AUMF because they are not associated with the forces of al-Qaida, the Taliban, or ISIS, but they can be targeted using the 2002 AUMF, as the prior administration did to take out Soleimani, consistent with longstanding practice.

Last year, the Trump administration ``strongly opposed'' repeal, saying it would ``terminate a critical legal authority'' and undermine our defense ``against ongoing threats from Iran and Iranian-sponsored proxies.''

The Biden administration now claims that it does not need the 2002 AUMF for current operations because it has Article II authority to use force without congressional authorization.

Is that what we are going to do now, is yield to the President's Article II authority without any congressional authorization?

Madam Speaker, that is precisely what this repeal does. It takes our authority, our Article I authorities, away. We are repealing our Article I authority and yielding it to the President of the United States.

Telling the President to rely solely on Article II, in my judgment, is a big step backward from the war powers reform and reasserting Congress' Article I powers.

It is also inconsistent with the War Powers Resolution. That law says that the President's Article II powers are limited to responding to an attack on the territory or Armed Forces of the United States. It does not cover American civilians in a foreign country, such as our contractors, our diplomats, and our embassy, who are under attack, as I speak, in Iraq.

We should not encourage any President to go it alone without Article I congressional authorization.

Finally, today's vote is not happening in a vacuum. This rushed, standalone repeal, without any consultation with the Department of Defense, the Secretary of State, or the intelligence community, as Mr. Mast has consistently talked about, sends a dangerous message of disengagement that could destabilize Iraq, embolden Iran, which it will, and strengthen al-Qaida and ISIS in the region.

We would avoid such dangers by taking up a repeal and a replacement simultaneously. I think both sides of the aisle agree, we need to update this AUMF, and we need to reform it to the modern-day threats in the region. Saddam Hussein is no longer the threat.

Real AUMF reform requires Congress and the administration to work together. The chairman has committed to doing this, and I appreciate and trust him. We work well together, but we have to do this, to work together with the administration to replace this aging AUMF with updated authorities needed to keep Americans safe from today's terrorist threats, an updated AUMF that reflects the modern-day threats in the region.

Again, I look forward to working together with Chairman Meeks and our colleagues on this if we are going to be serious about war powers reform. But this bill is not it. This bill is not responsible. We are not doing this the right way. If we are going to repeal it, let's update the AUMF to modern-day needs and reform it.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I would just like to comment that to me it is very interesting, the timing of the gentlewoman from California's repeal. It happened after President Trump had an air strike to take out Soleimani in Iraq, at exactly the same time. He had authority to do so under the 2002 AUMF and Article II under the Constitution.

What is interesting about now, the other side of the aisle was upset when President Biden struck the Shia proxies in Syria, and that is when we saw this bill resurrect itself again in this Congress. Very interesting timing.

What I object to is that now we are abdicating our responsibility by giving the President Article II authorities alone without any authorization of use of military force from the Congress. They talk a lot about Article I on the other side, but aren't we abdicating our Article I responsibility?

I am all for updating this thing, but to completely do away with it and just give this President Article II authorities to do whatever he wants without any congressional review, in my judgment, is a wrong step forward.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me just clarify again. This bill was filed last Congress after President Trump took out the mastermind of terror for two decades in the Middle East, Qasem Soleimani, to challenge his authority to take out one of the biggest

threats to the region and to our American soldiers, 600 of whom were killed and thousands wounded.

That is the genesis for this legislation, and I think that is important to note. If we do away with this without replacing it, we abdicate our Article I authorities in an absolute manner to the executive branch under Article II.

I think that it is important for anyone watching this debate to understand what we are doing here today.

Madam Speaker, with that, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kinzinger).

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mast), a combat veteran, a distinguished servicemember, and a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mast).

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert), a member of the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, just a brief comment, once again, that repealing this Authorization for Use of Military Force, which has been used in the past to take out Soleimani and other very bad actors, and not replacing it does not uphold our Article I responsibilities.

Mr. Speaker, in fact, what we are doing is ceding our authority under the Constitution to the executive branch and saying: Oh, Article II, the President has unlimited discretion under Article II to do whatever the hell he wants to do.

That is not what this Congress should be doing. We need to replace this with an updated AUMF that reflects the threats in the region, the current threats, which are Iran and the proxies of Iran that have hit our embassy, have killed our soldiers, and are attacking our diplomats in the region.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Just a point of clarification to the chairman. I am not talking about a declaration of war against Iran. What we are talking about is what is the current threat in Iraq. Today, it is proxies, the Shia proxies of Iran in Iraq.

The reason why President Biden hit them in Syria, it is the authorities that President Trump used to take out Soleimani in Iraq, not in Iran. Soleimani, ``The Butcher'', the mastermind of terror for two decades, killing 600 American soldiers and wounding thousands more.

I am all for updating this thing, but to replace this and throw it out with not anything to protect our men and women who are in Iraq today, including the diplomats, is highly irresponsible, it is reckless, and it is dangerous.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers), the lead Republican on the House Armed Services Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the gentleman. We need to exercise our Article I constitutional responsibilities and update this outdated AUMF. That is precisely what we are arguing today. We are not saying that we should replace this, but we shouldn't repeal without an updated AUMF that reflects the modern-day threats.

As I close later, I will talk about the chairman and I working on that effort. That is what this body should be doing, because otherwise, if we repeal this, we are again ceding our Article I responsibilities to the executive, and just giving him unlimited Article II powers.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I think I laid out our arguments, and I think it is irresponsible to repeal this authority, which still is used to protect our embassy diplomats and soldiers in Iraq against the Shia proxies of Iran.

I am committed to work with the chairman to update this outdated AUMF. And I think if there is any agreement in this Chamber, and also on both sides of the aisle, it is that we need to modernize it to the modern-day threats.

And as I read from the President's Statement of Administration Policy, the President says: I am committed to working with the Congress to ensure that outdated authorizations for the use of military force are replaced with a framework appropriate to ensure that we can continue to protect Americans from terrorist threats.

I agree with the President of the United States, and I think the chairman does as well. We have to do this, and it is not going to be easy, but it is time to update this outdated AUMF.

I would prefer to have repealed and replaced it with our updated AUMF. But as Brian Mast, a heroic veteran who lost his legs in battle, said, We cannot just repeal this and talk about updating when we haven't even talked to the Department of Defense, the Secretary of State, and the intelligence community about what is the modern-day threat, and what we need to do in Congress to exercise our Article I responsibilities that we have a responsibility to do, and not just cede everything to the executive branch under Article II.

The argument is made, well, this could be done under Article II. Well, that is probably true. But are we not abdicating our responsibility and ceding it to the executive branch by doing this? I would argue that we are.

Mr. Speaker, I want to close with the motion to recommit.

If we adopt the motion to recommit, we will instruct the Committee on Foreign Affairs to consider my amendment to H.R. 256. It responds to the serious escalation by Hamas against Israel that we saw in May.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, Hamas launched over 4,000 rockets at our closest allies in the Middle East. This was a stark reminder of the dangerous threats that Israel faces from Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, and other terrorist organizations.

For this reason, our MTR makes sure that the United States can quickly react to Israel's security needs in the event of future attacks.

If enacted, this language would establish contingency plans to provide Israel with defense articles such as munitions, ISR technology, aircraft, and related services. It would also create a waiver to expedite arms transfers if Israel is under threat of military attack.

This language passed the House last Congress with broad bipartisan support, and I encourage all of my colleagues to support it today.

I fear that the 2002 AUMF repeal we are considering today without a replacement may embolden our adversaries, especially Iran--the largest state sponsor of terror in the world--and its proxies by signaling that we are retreating from the Middle East.

Our MTR is intended to send a strong message that this is absolutely false. It will also send a message that passage will demonstrate our ironclad support for Israel and all our allies in the region.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the motion to recommit today, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.