Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of September 14, 2026, I call up the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 93), directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, we are here today to discuss the resolution again asking for the President to ``remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran, other than those elements of the

Armed Forces that may be necessary to defend the United States or an ally.''

I have spoken at length on this floor about Iranian threats, what they have been doing to the United States of America for the last 50 years or the last 50 months, the people that they have killed, the attacks that they have levied against us.

Mr. Speaker, I would love to hear from my colleagues, the authors, and the cosponsors of this legislation what do they think that we are defending the United States of America from? Again, I have spoken at length about it.

I would love to know, do they see a threat? Do they see no threat?

More specifically, about the letter of this law, the letter of this bill, what is it that the sponsors want removed? That is what it says: ``Remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran, other than those elements of the Armed Forces that may be necessary to defend the United States or an ally.''

What is it that you want removed? Do you want us to remove refueling aircraft so they cannot support Israel or Saudi Arabia?

Do you want us to remove our amphibious ready groups?

Shall we remove our MV-22 Ospreys, our Chinooks, our heavy-lift helicopters, our attack helicopters or our utility helicopters?

What about our Air Force and our naval aviation? What would you like removed there?

We have veterans from the Marine Corps, Army brothers, Army Rangers, others over here that I am guessing are here to speak about what they want removed from this space.

Do you want F-15s removed, F-15 Eagles? Do you want F-16 Falcons removed? Do you want F-35A or B removed or do you want them to remain? How about F-18 Super Hornets?

What is it that you want out of there? That is what you are asking for: ``Remove the United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran, other than those elements of the Armed Forces that may be necessary to defend the United States or an ally.''

What about our KC-135 Stratotankers or our Pegasus? What about our command presence? What is it that you want removed?

This is your resolution.

Do you want signals intelligence, electronic warfare, jamming maritime surveillance, ground surveillance removed? What is it that you want removed?

What about in terms of long-range precision strike capabilities? Would you like our carrier-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles removed from the space?

Do you want our air-launched precision weapons, our ground-launched precision fires, our ship-launched precision systems removed? What is it that you want removed? Do you want JDAMs removed?

What about in terms of drones? What is it that you want to remain or want removed? How about one-way attack drones, small commercial-style UAVs, larger reconnaissance-strike UAVs?

What personnel do you want removed? Because that is what this is calling for, removing all U.S. Forces.

Do you want logistics personnel removed? Intelligence? Maintenance? Medical? Communications? Headquarters command and control personnel? What do you want removed?

Do you want marines at our embassies removed?

Do you want pararescue jumpers removed?

Do you want us to remove some or all of our Patriot missile batteries from the area?

Can we destroy a missile but not destroy a launcher?

What is it that you want to take place?

Is all of this just because you do not want a naval blockade around Iran? Or is that not it?

I would ask that you be clear because I would love to hear from you exactly what forces you are demanding be removed.

To the sponsor of our bill, I would quote Representative Moulton: ``We have to acknowledge that Iran is a threat to American interests.''

To continue that quote--in fact, a brother in arms, and other brothers in arms over there, to continue that quote: ``I fought Iranians on the ground in Iraq in 2004. It was bloody. We won. And if necessary, I will fight Iran again.''

Iran was attacking us then, as you spoke about, and Iran has been attacking us at all points between that moment and now. I have spoken about it at length on this floor. I have submitted for the Record the ships they have attacked and the servicemembers that they killed long before Epic Fury.

They are continuously fighting us. They are a continuous, ongoing threat to the United States and a continuous threat to our allies. That had not stopped until a memorandum of understanding, and then they decided to resume attacks again.

So my question is, again, to the letter of this resolution: What is it that you want removed as you wrote this bill demanding?

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I would first respond to my colleague, the ranking member, about hearings that we have had. He has heard me say this before. He lived it. We had Secretary Rubio not too long ago. The ranking member left halfway through the hearing never to return. He didn't want to hear from Secretary Rubio. Some of his members took their time to talk about Secretary Rubio's shoes. That was their opportunity to hear from the administration at the highest levels, to talk a little bit about the threat of Iran.

I could use any window of time. I could identify hundreds of attacks in just the 30 months before Epic Fury, or I could identify hundreds more in the last 30 years.

I am going to use the window of time to identify a few, since my colleague, the marine, Representative Moulton, made the comments that I quoted earlier.

In January 2020, 109 U.S. troops suffered attack and injuries after an Iranian ballistic missile attack on Al Asad Air Base in Iraq. That was just one attack that took place in that ongoing window of time.

In March of '23, an Iranian drone attack killed an American contractor and wounded five U.S. servicemembers and another contractor in a strike on a coalition base in Syria.

In October of '23, Iran-backed terrorists, of course, as everybody is well aware, killed 46 Americans and kidnapped at least 12 Americans in the October 7 genocidal massacre.

In January of '24, Iran-backed Hezbollah terrorists killed 3 U.S. servicemembers and wounded more than 40 other servicemembers in a drone attack at Tower 22: Sergeant Rivers, Sergeant Sanders, and Sergeant Moffett.

In November of '24, an Iranian national and IRGC asset was charged with plotting to assassinate President Trump.

I have more. The list goes on and on. These are just some of the many attacks that I could list since Representative Moulton made the quote that I spoke about, where he is talking about his service and before Epic Fury began.

This is the continual threat, the imminent threat that Iran is and has been. They attack the United States of America every single chance they get. They attack in the Strait of Hormuz--not just the United States of America but any country going through there--every chance they get. This is just the first time that the United States of America has said enough is enough, that we will not tolerate this any longer.

That same entity that has been attacking us endlessly for all of these years will not be an entity that is allowed to have a nuclear weapon. Why? Because, at best, they now have the capability to hold the entire Gulf hostage because they have a nuclear weapon, and, at worst, they are an entity that does what they have been doing: utilize every asset at their disposal to attack the United States of America and our allies.

Mr. Speaker, I have spoken for a few minutes, and Ranking Member Meeks spoke for a few minutes. I don't know if we have come to that time where my colleague on the other side is happy to detail the pieces of equipment that he wants removed from the battle space, as he mentioned. As is the letter of this resolution, he wants to remove these U.S. forces from hostilities. I am hoping that now is that later time that the Representative will detail what he wants removed.

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

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

My colleague said: Good for Iran; bad for the U.S. Good for Iran; bad for the U.S. He went back and forth. The best thing for Iran are Representatives that are going to deny that Iran was killing Americans.

To quote my colleague, literally just now, after I just identified to him Sergeant Rivers, Sergeant Sanders, Sergeant Moffett killed at Tower 22 by the hand of Iran, he literally just told us: zero Americans killed. Somebody that is treating our servicemembers, their sacrifice like that, that is the best thing for Iran.

The best thing for Iran are those that have this idea that: Well, you know what? Iran has been attacking us for all these years, but if we bring that to an end, they might fight back. People that are scared of Iran fighting back when we stopped them, that is the best thing for Iran.

My colleague opened up by saying: Nobody on this floor is denying that Iran has been a threat. You don't have to look any further than immediately to your left. In one of the previous debates my colleague was discussing, he has seen no imminent threat from Iran. Ranking Member Meeks argued on this floor literally numerous times: no imminent threat from Iran.

Even though all of these Members, both Republican and Democrat, came to the floor of the House and literally took a vote to say-- Representative Moulton did not vote in favor of this, but many did--use any and all means necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Why? Why would that be a vote that overwhelmingly the floor of the House would vote in favor

of? It is because of the extreme, imminent threat that Iran proved themselves to be each and every day.

The dozens of times a month that Iran attacks the United States of America, month in, month out, regardless of the year, that is why everybody overwhelmingly took a vote to say: Use any and all means to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

The best thing for Iran are Representatives that are going to come to this floor, forget that they took a vote to prevent Iran by any means from obtaining a nuclear weapon, because it is politically convenient for them to do so.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, as I pointed out to the author of the bill that he need only look to his left to see somebody who totally disagreed. There are people that are down here denying that there is any threat posed by Iran. There is not agreement. It is something that, again, the floor of the House voted and said, use any and all means necessary to prevent them from having a nuclear weapon. You have people who can't even acknowledge that they are a threat.

It was said that we can't just go out there and wage war every time a threat just pops up. Iran is not a threat that just popped up. Iran is not some poorly funded militia. It is a country of 92 million people that has been putting every bit of spare currency into creating terrorist groups, funding military, developing nuclear weapons, and continually working to control and threaten the Strait of Hormuz. That is not a new thing.

Let's bring something new into this conversation. You take a company like Lloyds of London or some other big insurance company. They, literally, are out there writing policies for years, not just since Epic Fury, but for years, for every ship going in and out of the Strait of Hormuz, on their way in and on their way out.

Why are they writing these catastrophic risk insurance policies for every ship going in and every ship going out? They do so because of the threat that Iran has been demonstrating day in and day out, week in and week out, month in and month out, every single year.

There is a forever war. President Trump is absolutely against forever wars. That is what he is ending. Iran has been waging war forever against the United States of America. The forever of this regime, they have been waging war against the United States of America. It comes to an end in only one way: us bringing it to an end. That is what the United States of America is working to do.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleague said at the end of his comments that he would like to see the day that this war comes to an end. I don't think my colleague wants to see that day because, again, my colleague brought forward a resolution today saying remove any of these forces that are engaged with Iran from the area. Those are not the exact words, but that is basically what it says.

I have yet to see the identification of which forces my colleague wants out of there. It was promised. I haven't heard it, but I don't think that they want to see that day.

The strategy, one of many that is taking place, as you probably heard Secretary Rubio state: They fire at one of our ships, we destroy one of theirs. That is a change from what has taken place. They attack the United States of America or our interests or our allies, we respond.

That is the change. Not everybody has the stomach to respond to threats. That is just the world we live in. Few are capable, and few are willing.

This administration has the stones to say that Iran has been attacking us endlessly, this comes to an end. They attack us. We destroy them. They attack us. We destroy them. My colleague would capture that as good for Iran, but the truth is it is anything but good for Iran.

What took place against Iran? Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordo destroyed. There were 13,000 targets struck, 2,000 command-and-control targets defeated, 1,450 defense- and industrial-based targets destroyed, 1,500 air defense targets destroyed, 700 mine systems destroyed, 800 attack drones destroyed, 600 naval targets destroyed, 450 ballistic missile targets destroyed, 1,000 incoming attack drones intercepted, 700 ballistic missile threats intercepted. The list goes on and on. None of that is good for Iran.

Every single one of those that Iran has done, whether since Epic Fury or before, was intended to indiscriminately kill any civilian that they can, not just military targets but anybody that they can hit. Just like October 7 was to indiscriminately kill anybody that they can, not just military targets but anybody, civilian or otherwise.

That is what Iran's aim has been dozens of times a month, and that is what the United States of America is bringing to an end, whether by their willingness to leave their ways or when they are no longer capable to do so. That is the way that this ends for Iran.

It does take a strong stomach to do that. It does take individuals that are willing to acknowledge there were U.S. servicemembers that were killed before Epic Fury. If you are not recognizing that very serious and simple fact, then you are not understanding the threat of Iran and have no business dealing with it.

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

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.

I don't think I am going to need 11\1/2\ minutes, but I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to begin by answering some of my colleague's questions. When will we find the stomach in Congress to hold hearings on this war? I mentioned it already. The Committee on Foreign Affairs not too long ago held a hearing with Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The ranking member, as I pointed out, was walking out of the room, not wanting to stay and respond. He left midway through the hearing and didn't even want to stay to hear Secretary of State Rubio.

We have held hearings. Democrats, unfortunately, wasted a lot of their time trying to make quips about Secretary Rubio's shoes and other silly things really unbefitting members of that committee.

This resolution, in my opinion, is designed for two things. I don't believe it to be serious. I have seen the same language numerous times now. It is designed for political points. This is a resolution stating remove all of these forces from hostilities. I gave you a comprehensive list of forces, but you can't tell me one that you want removed. That is just political theater.

You are just saying you want something done, and either you haven't thought through what you actually want done or there is really nothing you want done. You just want to pretend and say it. That is political.

I think the second point of this resolution is to destroy our ability to pressure the Iranian regime by removing any offensive capabilities that we have in the region. I don't think they want an ability for us to go out there and say: We are going to hold this blockade over Iran because Iran has been attacking our ships, not just in the year 2026, but in the years 2025, 2024, and 2023, and well beyond. I have given the list on this floor numerous times of hundreds of attacks just in the 30 months before Epic Fury even took place.

Sometimes the only choice you have is you are going to hit back.

There have been a lot of questions asked on this floor. What I would like to know is: When are my Democrat colleagues going to have the stomach to hit back against an enemy that has been hitting us? Because, apparently, you don't have it.

You are unwilling to do so, and you are willing to come to the floor of the House and say things so untruthful, such as that there weren't any Americans killed prior to Epic Fury, to quote my colleague on the other side of the aisle, when just before that, I identified to my colleague three U.S. servicemembers who were killed, Sergeant Rivers, Sergeant Sanders, and Sergeant Moffett, and a list of hundreds who were injured by Iranian attacks.

All of those things were ignored so that they could say that there was nobody killed. Why ignore those things? Why ignore something so serious as servicemembers, our brothers and sisters, our brothers-and sisters-in-arms, being killed? Why ignore that? It is because it doesn't fit the political narrative. That is a sad thing.

I have the stomach to hit back our enemies. Some of my colleagues don't. That is the question on the floor here: Do you have the stomach to hit back our enemies, or are you going to throw up the flag of surrender and say: Remove these forces.

We don't know what they are. We don't know what they are doing. We don't know the capabilities that they bring. We don't know the increased danger that it puts other forces in to remove them. We don't know anything about it, but remove them because it is politically expeditious, instead of having the stomach to go out there and seek and destroy the enemies of the United States of America, as we trained to do.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to briefly respond to the remarks from my colleague from Florida.

The gentleman from Florida has asked two basic questions. The first is: Is Iran a threat?

The second is: What troops or materiel should be removed?

There is actually a very simple answer. He answered the first one himself by quoting me when I have in the past many times said that Iran is a serious threat.

The second question: What should be removed? Also has a very simple answer. We should remove the troops and materiel that are going towards a war that has not only failed but backfired. These are troops and materiel that are depleting resources needed elsewhere in the globe. That is a very simple answer to the gentleman's question, which I will be happy to detail later.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Florida delivered a comprehensive list of many of the threats that Iran has presented to us in the past. I have not heard any Democrat, myself or otherwise, debate those threats.

The question is: Is Iran a threat today? I think my colleague would agree that they are.

The second question is: Is Iran more of a threat today than they were before this war began? I think anyone with common sense would agree that they are.

Never before has Iran controlled the world economy, brought the world economy to its heels, by closing the Strait of Hormuz as a result of this war not only failing but backfiring.

If we are serious about the threat, then we ought to have a serious strategy to address it. We ought to have a strategy that actually works, whereas this strategy has failed.

I stand here today with my colleagues to do what Congress failed to do for us and our brothers- and sisters-in-arms in Iraq two decades ago: to actually ask tough questions as the Constitution directs us to do--rather than be subservient to another war-mongering administration--and then have the courage to vote to end a war that should never have begun.

I joined over 100,000 other young Americans 23 years ago in invading Iraq in the spring, and we came home to a victory parade in the fall, a victory parade not long after President Bush landed on an aircraft carrier and declared: Mission Accomplished.

We all know it wasn't a victory in 2003, far from it. We were still fighting that Middle Eastern war 20 years later. Mr. Speaker, 4,492 U.S. servicemembers were killed in Iraq, and 32,292 were wounded. Iraq civilian casualties stretched into the hundreds of thousands.

Congress failed to ask the most basic question it owed those families: Was this worth it? It is the same question we are failing to ask today, Mr. Speaker.

That is the price of a war that Congress refused to stop. It is a price that Republicans in Congress are choosing right now to let another generation start paying.

Our President declares victory a couple of times a week--well over 30 times so far--and doesn't dare to try to land a plane on an aircraft carrier to do so. Our carriers can't even land themselves in ports for resupply because our allied ports are now in too much danger of an Iranian attack. We have made our allied ports less safe in the very Gulf where we are fighting this war.

What a remarkably dumb war--dumb. Dumb, you say? Well, let's discuss for a minute what this war has achieved--not using independent metrics, not Democratic metrics, but the very metrics the President has used since day one.

We will start with oil. Well, oil prices are up. We are all paying more at the pump and more in the stores for goods shipped with oil. Good for Iran. Bad for us.

Iran's nuclear program is still intact. In fact, it is more than intact since the President just started talking about yet more strikes against a nuclear program that he and Secretary Hegseth said was obliterated. They were lying, or Iran is rebuilding. Either way: Good for Iran. Bad for us.

Of course, we don't know as much detail on their nuclear program as we once did when we had weapons inspectors and 24/7 electronic monitoring in Iran under President Obama. Trump got rid of those safeguards. Good for Iran. Bad for us.

What about projecting power? We hear a lot about Iran projecting power and what a problem this is in the Middle East and even right here at home, where, as my colleague mentioned, Iran is trying to assassinate officials--officials that the President removed protection from as if to encourage Iran. This measure is truly remarkable because Iran is projecting more power than Iran has ever projected in the history of the world. Never before has the Islamic republic singlehandedly leveraged the entire world economy. Another thing good for Iran; bad for us.

What about ballistic missiles? We were told their ballistic missiles were eliminated. It only took about $30 billion of our American taxpayer dollars to supposedly do so. Then we learned a matter of weeks later that they still have a lot of missiles and are recovering more. We haven't even begun to talk about the drones that have inflicted more damage than their missiles.

Here is the real kicker. While we were bombing their missiles with only moderate effectiveness, President Trump actually lifted the sanctions on Iran--lifted the sanctions on our adversary that they have admitted is a serious threat to the United States in the middle of a war. They kill a bunch of Americans, and we lift the sanctions? That is quite a strategy.

That alone gave Iran a gift of about $10 billion. Well, you know what? You can buy a lot of ballistic missiles for $10 billion. You don't even need to worry about your industrial base. In fact, you can buy Russian or Chinese ballistic missiles that are more sophisticated than what Iran already has. Yet again: Good for Iran. Bad for us.

Of course, the Strait of Hormuz is still closed. A reminder: The strait was open, and has been open in the entire history of the Islamic Republic, before Trump declared victory. It is truly remarkable. Good for Iran; bad for us.

What about their navy? We supposedly obliterated that, too. Yet, we can't open the strait. Any allied tankers require heavy naval escorts, and no art of the deal has gotten Iran to budge.

Any military planner, had the administration asked a single one of them, would have told you Iran could close the strait. It is still effectively closed. Good for Iran; bad for us.

How about their air defenses? We obliterated those, too, shortly before Iran shot down one of our Apache helicopters. Over two decades in Afghanistan, a war my colleague knows well and for which he has seriously sacrificed, and not a single Apache was shot down. Yet, after we supposedly obliterated their air defenses, we lose one to Iran. Good for Iran; bad for us.

What about regime change? That was the stated objective of the President from day one. Now, I want to be a fair arbiter, as we all should in Congress. So on this one count I will give the administration credit. They did achieve regime change. They took out an 86-year-old religious zealot in failing health, who had a fatwa against producing nuclear weapons, and replaced him with someone in his fifties, who is apparently even more committed to their nuclear program, alongside a military government that so far seems more effective than the religious government it replaced. So Trump got regime change. It has just been good for Iran; bad for us.

All of this translates to one sad, embarrassing but unavoidable conclusion: Iran is winning, and America is losing. We didn't get rid of the threat. We empowered it. If that is not dumb, Mr. Speaker, I don't know what is.

Remember when Donald Trump said this war would last just a few weeks? Well, it has been over 6 months and counting.

In April, Pete Hegseth stood at a podium and proudly declared a capital V military victory. He said the United States had achieved every single objective. He said that America's objectives were unchanged, on target, and on plan. Yet, as I have just detailed, it seems like we have achieved Iran's objectives quite effectively for them.

Those were Hegseth's terms. He declared victory on them. Really? Well, here's a question for Secretary Hegseth and for every Republican who has taken his word for it since: If we already won, then why is Iran still in control of the Strait of Hormuz? If we already won, why are gas prices still climbing? Why are diesel prices at historic highs, the highest ever? What an achievement.

If we already won, why are our troops still getting hurt 6 months after Hegseth stood up before the American people and declared this victory was won?

If we already won, why does Iran's nuclear program still exist? Compare the state of Iran's nuclear program today to what President Obama achieved with the Iran nuclear deal. Ninety-eight percent of Iran's uranium stockpile was gone. Enrichment was capped at a level so low that it could not be weaponized. The Strait of Hormuz was open, and zero American troops were killed and zero were wounded. All that, and no war was required.

All of this losing that Trump and Hegseth have been doing comes at a tremendous cost: 18 U.S. servicemembers killed.

At $100 billion and counting, that translates to an additional $602 for every American taxpayer on average. How many Americans, how many constituents of mine or the Congressman from Florida, want to be paying $602 in taxpayer money to lose a war in Iran?

Now, I am saying all this standing here in Congress. Mr. Speaker, how about we stand up for our troops and our citizens for a change rather than perpetuating a war that, by all these measures, on the administration's own terms, is good for Iran and bad for us?

I think it is time to get some common sense, stop taking Trump and Hegseth at their word, find the courage to follow the Constitution and act as our own branch of government, end this war before it gets worse, and stop doing more for Iran than we are doing for us.

Our job is to help America, Mr. Speaker, not help Iran.

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

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

I will respond briefly to my colleague from Florida. My colleague has made a very convincing case, Mr. Speaker, for why we ought to have a strategy or use means necessary to actually defeat the threat from Iran, not a strategy that has backfired and empowered them.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Crow).

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

Mr. Speaker, I detailed how on so many counts--oil, nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and regime change that we are worse off today than we were when this war started, but I thank my colleague from Florida for bringing up another one, which is insurance rates.

I ask my colleague: Are insurance rates higher or lower to go through the Strait of Hormuz today than they were 5, 10, or 50 years ago? Everyone knows, Mr. Speaker, it is worse.

Then my colleague said, well, that is why we need to end this forever war. How is that going? What are we up to, 40 times that President Trump has said the war is ending. I would like to see the day.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Schneider).

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

Mr. Speaker, in closing, before my colleague launched into a Westmoreland-like list of targets, which has nothing to do with whether or not we are actually winning this war, he talked about the President having the stomach to go to war, maybe the stomach to end it.

I would ask my colleague, who is the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, when we are going to find the stomach in Congress to just hold a hearing on this war? That shouldn't be a very high bar. Yet, the chairman hasn't reached it.

Why is it that the Republicans in Congress will literally cancel votes before they have a vote on the most important responsibility that we have?

If the end is truly in sight for this war, then why, as I have detailed on every single measure, is it getting worse and the threat is increasing?

Yes, Iran has been a threat for a really long time, and that is why we should have a strategy that ends the threat, not further empowers Iran.

Yes, Americans have been killed in the past by Iran. The question is will more Americans be killed in the future? I think we all know, sadly, what that answer is today.

Mr. Speaker, the Constitution delegates to Congress no more important responsibility than deciding when to send the best of America, our young Americans, to war--decisions that make our families more or less safe here at home.

The unmistakable conclusion of this debate is that Iran is sadly better off today, more empowered today than they were before this began, this unconstitutional, illegal, dumb war that has truly not just failed but backfired. Doubling down with wars escalating follows the precedent set by other forever wars in the Middle East.

We haven't even talked about the greatest threat in the world today, which is not Iran, but Xi Jinping in China. As we take more and more assets away from deterring China, away from deterring Russia, which is inching closer and closer to starting a war with NATO in Europe, it is a gift to Putin and Xi Jinping, a gift.

This war has been a tactical failure and a strategic disaster. We are not better off than we were before, and that is why we need to bring it to an end.

But, most fundamentally, we ought to have the courage or, as my colleague says, the stomach to debate it, to talk about it, to not continually try to put off these votes, but to have the courage to vote on these resolutions for the American people, the constituents that we represent, and then go home and ask them--constituents in Florida, constituents in Massachusetts, and military families all across the world--whether this is worth it, whether a war that we are losing is worth their sacrifice, worth their taxpayer dollars.

Let's have the courage to take that vote and then answer to our constituents, because our troops, our families, and the American citizens deserve nothing less.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of July 22, 2026, I call up the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 89) directing the President pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I will take some of my time and give recognition to those who we have lost in the fight to end the Iranian terror regime. I am going to say their names, going to tell you where they served, and I am going to show you their photo:

Sergeant Angel S. Rampersad, United States Army;

Private First Class Isabella Gonzales, United States Army;

First Lieutenant Tyler James Feehan, United States Army;

Sergeant Michael Emmanuel Swinton, United States Army;

Lance Corporal Kevin Melendez, United States Marine Corps;

Tech Sergeant Tyler Simmons, United States Air Force;

Tech Sergeant Ashley Pruitt, United States Air Force;

Captain Curtis Angst, United States Air Force;

Captain Seth Koval, United States Air Force;

Captain Ariana Savino, United States Air Force;

Major John ``Alex'' Klinner, United States Air Force;

Sergeant Benjamin N. Pennington, United States Army;

Chief Warrant Officer 3 Robert Marzan, United States Army;

Major Jeffrey Robert O'Brien, United States Army;

Sergeant Declan J. Coady, United States Army;

Sergeant First Class Noah L. Tietjens, United States Army;

Sergeant First Class Nicole M. Amor, United States Army; and

Captain Cody A. Khork, United States Army.

The sacrifice of these servicemembers will never be forgotten by me, and

their commitment to their country, our country, the United States of America; their commitment to their loved ones; their commitment to seeing Iran's reign of terror and regime finally come to an end; and their commitment to ending the regime that killed countless American lives.

That is what these servicemembers have been fighting against. That is what they gave their lives fighting against, a regime that has been attacking and taking the lives of United States of America's servicemembers and citizens for years.

To belittle this mission is to belittle and demean the very service these members gave their lives for. Their sacrifice was not meaningless. This operation is bringing a reckoning for the hundreds of times Iran has attacked and killed people of the United States of America.

What were those times? I am not going to go all the way back to the Beirut bombings. I wouldn't have time for that in tonight's debate with the time that we are limited to. I am only going to go back for the last couple of years to talk about what Iran has been doing to the United States of America, though my colleagues will argue that there has never been any imminent threat against the United States of America by Iran.

IRGC naval forces capture 10 American sailors and two boats.

Separate incident: Four patrol boats from Iran's IRGC attack the USS Nitze.

Separate incident: United States Naval Ship Invincible attacked by multiple approaching IRGC fast-attack boats, small attack boats.

Separate incident: IRGC vessel attacks USS Thunderbolt in Persian Gulf.

Separate incident: Iranian drone attacks the USS Nimitz as fighter jets are landing.

Separate attack: IRGC naval personnel place and detonate limpet mines on two Saudi-, one UAE-, and one Norwegian-registered ships.

Separate incident: IRGC Navy attacks four ships--Saudi ships, Norwegian ships, and a UAE ship.

Separate incident: IRGC Navy attack one Japanese ship and one Norwegian-owned ship as they transit the Gulf of Oman.

Separate incident: IRGC shoot down U.S. aircraft operating over international waters, over the Strait of Hormuz.

Separate incident: IRGC Navy seizes British-flagged, Swedish-owned tanker, and they hold the crew hostage for more than 2 months. On that same day, the IRGC also detained a Liberian-flagged tanker.

Separate incident: Iran attacks, by helicopter and drone, a U.S. Navy ship in the Strait of Hormuz.

Separate incident: IRGC Navy attack and seize Hong Kong-flagged tanker.

Separate incident: 11 IRGC Navy small boats attack five U.S. Navy vessels.

Separate incident: Iran vessels attack U.S. ships, including U.S. Coast Guard cutter.

Separate incident: Iranian personnel board a Liberian-flagged tanker.

Separate incident: IRGC attack and seize South Korean tanker, in the Strait.

Separate incident: Tanker MT Mercer attack by Iran off of Oman, killing two people.

Separate incident: Asphalt Princess attacked off of UAE, boarded by Iranians.

Separate incident: Iranian forces seized two Greek vessels as they attacked them.

Separate incident: Tanker Pacific Zircon was hit by an Iranian drone.

Separate incident: Iran's Navy capture off the Marshall Islands a Marshall Islands-flagged tanker.

Separate incident: IRGC seize Panamanian-flagged oil tanker in Strait of Hormuz, in international waters.

Separate incident: Iran Navy seize Marshall Islands-flagged oil tanker St. Nikolas while transiting the Gulf of Oman.

Separate incident: IRGC seize containership MSC, in a helicopter, and also raided in the Strait of Hormuz.

Separate incident: IRGC seize another tanker, the Talara.

Separate incident: IRGC seize foreign oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz.

Separate incident: U.S.-flagged tanker attacked by Iranian gunboats in the Strait of Hormuz.

The list goes on and on. I could keep reading this for probably another at least 10 minutes with the pages that I have of these.

That is what our U.S. servicemembers are fighting against, an Iran that chooses to wage war against the United States of America day in, day out, week in, week out.

Prior to Epic Fury ever beginning, the 30 months prior to Epic Fury beginning, Iran attacked us over 350 times. That is what our U.S. servicemembers are fighting against, the Iran that, prior to Epic Fury ever beginning, killed three U.S. servicemembers at Tower 22. That is what our U.S. servicemembers are fighting against.

My colleagues will say that no imminent threat ever existed. They are the same colleagues that used to tell us we should use any and all means necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Why? Because they recognized back then that that is the Iran that we have been dealing with day in, day out, week in, week out, year in, year out, the Iran that has been relentlessly attacking the United States of America tankers and containerships, United States Navy vessels, Coast Guard vessels, firing on our personnel in Iraq, Syria, Jordan, anywhere in the Middle East that they could fire on them.

What has changed since these attacks? Everything that I listed off happened well before Operation Epic Fury. What has changed? The Ayatollah that ordered the attacks on our bases, on the bases of our allies, is now rotting 6 feet under.

What has changed? Their navy that carried out countless attacks on our cargo ships, all those that I listed off just now, the navy that was attacking, seizing, holding hostage, they are sitting at the bottom of the waters that they used to float in.

Their Air Force that carried out attacks on our bases and against our allies, they have been grounded and obliterated.

Those are just a couple of the things that have changed.

This was not a war of choice. This was not President Trump's war of choice. This is and always has been Iran's choice that they made each and every day for the last 47 years. What I gave you were just some of the incidents of the last couple years.

We simply said: No more wars. Instead, we are putting a stop to the old ones. This ends here. This ends now.

That country, their IRGC, their proxies that have been attacking us endlessly will no longer exist and will not obtain a nuclear weapon, whether my colleagues forgot that they voted to say that or not.

Mr. Speaker, in regard to today's War Powers Resolution that asks for the removal of our U.S. Forces, as my colleagues have done week in and week out, forgetting about every single thing that our servicemembers are out there fighting against, I urge a ``no'' vote on their legislation.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, both of my colleagues said forever war. I stood here and read for about 15 minutes about the attacks that Iran has been leveling against us just for the last couple of years: 350 attacks, 30 months, 200 wounded, four killed. That is the forever war. It has been going on for 47 years, but that is just the last 30 months of the forever war Iran has been waging against us.

To end a war that is waged against us every single day, you have to end the people that are waging that war. That is what is taking place.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would say to my colleague that I thank him for the recognition of my service, and I recognize him for his service, as well.

I am proud to have brothers in arms, but I cannot let what was said, that is unequivocally false, stand.

Number one, North Korea and Russia have not killed 4 Americans, wounded 200, and attacked over 350 times in the 30 months just prior to Epic Fury beginning. There is no comparison. That is what Iran has done.

Unequivocally, Iran was working to develop a nuclear weapon in their research facilities and development facilities of Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordow. You need only listen to the words of Iranian generals and the Ayatollah in the last couple weeks and months saying they will not cease their pursuit of a nuclear weapon.

Don't take my word for it. Just listen to the words of the Iranian leadership.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am going to begin by agreeing with something that my colleague said. We didn't ask for this. We didn't ask for Iran, again, as I have said already, to attack us over 350 times in just the 30 months prior to Operation Epic Fury. We did not ask for that.

I want to read from the concurrent resolution offered by my colleague from Washington: ``Remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran,'' with the exception of forces that would ``prevent the United States from defending itself, its Armed Forces, its diplomatic facilities, or allied states, from imminent attack.''

Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 seconds to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal) to tell us which units, which ships she would like removed.

Mr. Speaker, I would read from the resolution again: Remove United States Forces from hostilities against Iran, except for those that are tasked with defending it, its armed forces, its diplomatic facilities from imminent attack.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 seconds to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal) asking what forces she would like removed.

Mr. Speaker, again, we have an author of this bill that is demanding U.S. Forces be removed, and the author of this bill has absolutely no clue what forces she wants to remove. That is beyond irresponsible, to say the least, to write a resolution, bring it to the floor, demand something with the weight of this issue, a nuclear-armed Iran, an Iran that has been attacking us, killing our people for years--350 attacks, 4 dead, 200 wounded just in the 30 months before Epic Fury began. She says remove all forces--that is the legislation before us--and has no clue what forces she wants to remove.

There are a lot of adjectives I could use, but my words will be taken down if I start to use them, so I am going to close.

My colleagues keep saying that this is a war of choice. The Islamic Republic has made their choice. They chose to attack Americans every day. I read off for 15 minutes the attacks that have been coming against us. They chose to support terrorist proxies, killing of Americans and our allies to develop weapons of mass destruction and missiles to reach out and touch our homeland and our allies.

They also chose to scrap the MOU that President Trump put in place when he ended Epic Fury and to again engage in hostilities and attempt to extort the world for shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

We do have a choice, Mr. Speaker, and sometimes the only choice is whether you are going to hit back when you, yourself, are getting hit. We have been hit, day in, day out--I read it off--and for the first time, we are finally responding.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge the United States House of Representatives to pass my War Powers Resolution to end President Trump's illegal and unconstitutional war in Iran.

Let me be clear: We should not have to be here, yet again, voting on another War Powers Resolution. For the first time in history, both the House and Senate passed a War Powers Resolution to rein in this reckless war and reassert our constitutional authority under Article I, Section 8 to authorize the use of military force.

However, the President is, once again, showing his contempt for Congress and for the Constitution, continuing this destructive, deadly, and costly war despite Congress having already passed a War Powers Resolution that has the force of law declaring that this war must stop.

Instead of respecting Congress' Article I sole constitutional authorities over war, the President has doubled down on more illegal strikes, escalating the situation in the region and leading to more Iranian strikes that killed two United States soldiers as well as an additional servicemember who was killed during a controlled detonation of a downed Iranian attack drone.

Gas prices across the country have gone up again. The memorandum of understanding has turned into a deadly memorandum of misunderstanding with the Iranian Government continuing to utilize leverage over the Strait of Hormuz.

This is an illegal and unconstitutional war waged without authorization from Congress and at a tremendous cost of a total of 18 U.S. servicemembers who have lost their lives and hundreds more who have been injured.

I give tremendous honor and respect to our servicemembers, those who serve, those who have sacrificed their lives, including U.S. Air Force Captain Ariana G. Savino who is from my home State of Washington.

The cost of this war is incalculable. Not only have we lost 18 U.S. servicemembers, but this war has been waged at the cost of thousands of civilians who have been displaced or killed in the region, and all on the backs of U.S. taxpayers who desperately want this administration to focus on the crisis of their pocketbooks: The basic inability of Americans in the richest country in the world to afford healthcare, gas, groceries, and housing.

From the beginning, this war has had no clear mission, no strategy, no end goal. It has been driven over and over again by a President who won his election by telling the American people that he would end forever wars and instead has launched us into more forever wars to distract the American people from the real issues they are facing at home.

As the secretary of forever wars, Pete Hegseth, announced, we have already spent $37.5 billion on this illegal and unconstitutional war. Donald Trump has called affordability a hoax, stated that we have no money for healthcare, and refused to sign a bipartisan bill to help address the housing crisis that this country is facing. Today, on the House floor, Republicans have put bills forward to demand $1.15 trillion for the Pentagon, the only Federal agency that has actually failed eight consecutive audits, and he is about to put another $73 billion into this illegal war.

What an insult to the tens of millions of Americans who have lost healthcare and nutrition assistance, all to pay, initially, for $4 trillion in tax breaks for giant corporations and billionaires.

Again, let's be very clear. The American people are paying the price of this war literally through our tax dollars that Donald Trump refuses to spend to benefit the lives of Americans here at home; through the lives of our United States servicemembers who ask only that their willingness and their pride in serving be rewarded with our real thoughtfulness of purpose before sending them into war; through the pain at the gas pump and the grocery store as prices continue to tick up; through the broken relationships with allies around the world who no longer believe that the United States is a real partner to them; through the sacrifices of the American people who desperately want this administration and this Congress to focus on making their lives affordable so they can actually thrive rather than just barely survive.

Regime change, Mr. Speaker, doesn't work. It never has, and it never will. In Iraq, more than 4,000 troops were killed and 32,000 were injured. In Afghanistan, 2,400 troops were killed, and 20,000 were injured. Those two wars alone cost at least $2.4 trillion, and neither led to freedom or peace for the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, and the toll on our own people--lives lost and ruined, PTSD, wasted dollars--is immense.

We have got to stop thinking that bombs are the answer. They are not. Let us remember that it was Donald Trump in his first term who pulled us out of the Iran nuclear deal, the JCPOA, a landmark agreement negotiated by President Obama that required 2 years of careful negotiations to restrict Iran's ability to enrich and stockpile enriched uranium and to ensure regular inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities, supply chains, and uranium mines. Had the JCPOA been left in place, we would not be in this situation today. It would have worked to minimize Iran's nuclear threat and strengthen Iranian civil society instead of slapping sanctions on and deepening the brutal regime's hold.

I want to thank Ranking Member Meeks for his tremendous leadership on this issue. I want to thank my Democratic and Republican colleagues who are voting for this bill for their clarity of conscience and of Constitution. I also want to thank Congressman Crow for his partnership on this War Powers Resolution as well as the bipartisan group of Members who have cosponsored, many of whom have served in uniform for our country and uniquely understand the immense sacrifice and duty of serving in our Armed Forces.

I hope that there are even more on the other side who listen to this debate and are moved to join us in passing this War Powers Resolution with even more strength in votes than the last one. Our Founders knew that going to war was one of the most solemn decisions that our country would face and that it had to be debated and authorized only by the elected Representatives of the people of the United States of America, Congress, not by a President who ignores his obligation to the institution and his obligation to the people of the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this War Powers Resolution. We must end this war now.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Crow).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Colorado.

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

Mr. Speaker, this vote is a vote of conscience. We are begging our colleagues here in Congress to stand up for our fellow Americans, for the Constitution, and for our Article I powers that our Founders thought so carefully about when they wrote the Constitution.

This war is remarkably unpopular. It is so unpopular that it is America's least popular war since polls began, and that has been true since the first bombs were dropped. This war is unpopular even amongst President Donald Trump's own supporters.

Back in May, only half of self-proclaimed MAGA Republicans thought that the war was worth the cost. Now, 2 months later, only about a third do. That is a 13-point drop in just 2 months. Amongst all Americans, a staggering 70 percent disapprove of this President's handling of the war and almost two-thirds of all Americans, including over half of MAGA supporters, blame Trump's war on Iran for their rising prices.

I think it is important for us to understand that these moments of conscience in our country require a strength of conviction and courage that our constituents expect us to have.

When they elect us, they expect us to honor the oath of office that we took. They expect us to understand the implications of the responsibilities that are conferred on us by that United States Constitution. They expect us to vote regardless of party for the thing that will keep Americans safe. They expect us to take care of the needs that they have right here at home.

What we have seen over and over again is a refusal of this administration to do that. The lack of clarity about the reasons for this war are quite remarkable. The administration has continued to flip-flop between claiming that we have won the war and then later that more bombs are needed.

After Operation Midnight Hammer in June 2025, the Trump administration told us that U.S. strikes on Iran had destroyed their military and obliterated nuclear programs. After the initial strikes on Iran, Secretary Hegseth said that the Iranian military was ``destroyed'' and ``made combat ineffective.''

In April, he declared Operation Epic Fury was a ``historic and overwhelming victory'' and that the United States achieved ``every single objective,'' but this is plainly false, and the American people know it.

Months after Hegseth claimed victory, Iran continued to strike American assets in the Middle East, kill American servicemembers, and close the Strait of Hormuz. The administration has clearly gotten us into a war that they have no clue how to get us out of.

Americans deserve a clear strategy, not shifting explanations that change by the day. They deserve thoughtful diplomacy, not tweets like the one the President just released today: ``From this point forward, any time the Islamic Republic of Iran shoots at a ship in the Strait of Hormuz, whether it be by missile, rocket, drone, or any other device or weapon, the United States will bomb and destroy ONE BRIDGE OR POWER PLANT, including those located next to, or in, the Capital City of Tehran. Thank you for your attention to this matter, President Donald J. Trump.''

This is irresponsible behavior from the President of the United States. It is irresponsible behavior on the backs of War Powers Resolutions that passed in a bipartisan way in both the House and the Senate, telling the President to end this illegal and unconstitutional war.

It is irresponsible behavior that is going to lead to more deaths of United States servicemembers and civilians around the world. It does not deescalate. It does not create coalitions of allies. It does not do anything to address the issues that Americans are facing right here at home.

Mr. Speaker, I close where I started. This is a vote of conscience. This is a vote that requires us to find the strength to do what is right for the American people and to send the clearest, even stronger message to this President of the United States that the United States Congress, the House of Representatives, is reasserting our authority over war. This war must end. Vote ``yes'' on this War Powers Resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, how I would like to respond to the gentleman is: We actually need a strategy.

Have you seen a strategy of which ships are where? What are we planning to do? What is our end goal? How do we intend to achieve a mission?

We have had no classified briefings, not a single classified-- The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida is now recognized.

Mr. Speaker, I would again respond to the chairman by asking: When will we have a single classified briefing, a single hearing in the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on this war?

Is the chairman prepared to say that we will have that hearing on this war?

Why are we so afraid of having a public hearing on the issue of whether or not we should be at war in Iran? Where is the chairman's commitment to the American people?

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the hardest part of this job for me for all the time that I have been in Congress, all the bills that we have to vote on-- when I put my hand up and swore that I would abide by and protect the Constitution of the United States of America, that Constitution also says that Congress determines when we send our women and men into war. I have had to vote on that several times previously in this Congress. It is a responsibility that is tough, to make that determination of when our men and women are sent to war. Presidents, based upon that Constitution, should come to this body and make their case, and then we have the awesome responsibility of making the determination of whether or not they should or should not. Those have been the toughest votes for me to have and for me to make as a Member of the United States Congress.

Unfortunately, in this instance, we didn't have a voice. My heart goes out to the 18 members of the United States armed services who lost their lives. To them, their families, they are patriots, just as Mr. Mast doing his service and Mr. Crow and Mr. Moulton.

I thank them for their service because if this Congress says, Go to war, they put their lives on the line. I wish I had the opportunity to talk to all 18 families who lost loved ones in this war. Unfortunately, I can't do all 18.

One of the three that lost their life over the last weekend, Sergeant Angel Rampersad, is from my district, my constituent, in Ozone Park, New York, who was killed on July 17 in Jordan. I am going to visit that family when I get back to New York on Friday. My office has already reached out to them. I am going to have a flag flown on top of the Capitol.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of Representative Jayapal's Iran War Powers Resolution because I believe that the President needs to come to us so that we can make that decision and take on that responsibility, as the Constitution says.

Let me be clear: This body has already spoken. The War Powers Resolution passed with bipartisan support in the House and in the Senate. The Trump administration was required to end its hostilities against Iran. It has not.

A dual-Chamber concurrent resolution has never been struck down by the courts, certainly not in the war powers context. Any claim otherwise is simply wrong.

I will also be introducing legislation that would require the Speaker to bring suit against the administration to force it to abide by Congress' vote on the War Powers Resolution.

We are here today because the administration broke the law. Three more U.S. servicemembers have made the ultimate sacrifice for an illegal, unauthorized war that the American people don't want.

This administration has never sought an Authorization for Use of Military Force from Congress, and most Republicans in this Chamber continue to enable it.

As I have said before on this floor, this war has achieved none of our core objectives, and more bombings will not change the reality that is on the ground.

With respect to Iran's nuclear program, its hard-line regime, its closure of the Strait of Hormuz, or any of its malign practices, none of that has changed. Addressing those threats requires diplomacy, not more war. Diplomacy must be led by seasoned diplomats and nonproliferation experts, not real estate developers.

We need our European allies, our Gulf partners, and, yes, our adversaries back at the table because just bombing without strategy, Mr. Speaker, is not a foreign policy. It is a tantrum. It is a tantrum by a President who cannot clean up the mess that he has made.

Let us make no mistake: The President's tantrum is why gas prices are back over $4 a gallon, and they will keep climbing now that the Houthis have threatened their own blockade of the Red Sea. That tantrum is why American troops are under fire. It is why our munitions stockpiles are being drained, and it is why we are teetering on the edge of the forever war we warned this would be.

To my Republican colleagues, this war is indefensible. Deep down, many of them really know it. I say: Let's just simply uphold the oath that we took when we took this office, uphold the Constitution of the United States. Stand with us, and let's make clear once again that this President is not a king. He is not a dictator. He is the President of the United States. But there are two bodies called the House of Representatives and the Senate that are equal to the executive branch.

He cannot go around this. It is in violation of the Constitution, and he cannot wage war without our consent.

If Republicans still believe this war should continue, then I say, fine. Vote in support of this measure and demand the administration come to this Congress and demand that he tells us what his plan is, how it is going to end, and how much money it is going to cost the American people. Also he should follow the Constitution as the law requires.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moulton), a cosponsor of this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I say to my colleagues that it has been 144 days of a senseless and a pointless war. The President says he is there to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon. In his first term, the President ripped up the JCPOA, as the gentlewoman from Washington has indicated.

I was in Congress at that time when the JCPOA was implemented. The United States was not by itself. It was a well-thought-out, diplomatic document that was produced that was clear. It wasn't something that was done by individuals who heretofore only was involved in real estate. It was done with diplomats around the world and even some of our adversaries in Russia and China, the P5+1.

I traveled several times to Geneva to have dialogue and conversation with the head of the IAEA, and I, along with some other colleagues, was told that at that particular time, for the first time, they had their eyes on Iran and its nuclear capabilities. They had cameras watching everything. All of the individuals said that Iran was, at the closest, a year to a year and a half, and could not progress because of what we were doing in a collective manner to prevent them from having a nuclear weapon.

The IAEA was there until when? The President ripped it up.

That is when the cameras and the watching of what was taking place there and the agreement that had been made through a diplomatic channel ended, and Iran pushed us out. That is when we no longer could see what was taking place.

Diplomacy was preventing Iran from having a nuclear weapon without the Strait of Hormuz being closed, without the death of the men and women of our military, without the cost of rising prices of food because fertilizer couldn't get through the strait, or the cost of gas. We had allies with us.

Are we better off now when we are doing all of this basically by ourselves? Because everyone advised this President of the United States not to do it.

Mr. Speaker, with 18 lives of servicemembers, too many Iranian civilians, including more than 100 schoolgirls, and injured countless more, tens of billions of taxpayer dollars spent, and the administration still refuses to give us a full accounting of where that money went.

Now, even as they refuse to explain the cost, guess what? They are asking for billions more for a war that they

never asked the United States Congress to authorize, a war that the people of the United States of America never asked for. As indicated by the gentlewoman from Washington, 70 percent of Americans are against this war.

But you know what, Mr. Speaker, the House and the Senate have spoken. They have already voted in a bipartisan way to end this war. Today, let's vote again, and I believe we will get an even greater margin in this House.

Let's not give this President another blank check to wage an illegal war. This is not what the Constitution demands of us. This is not what our constituents expect of us. They expect us to do our jobs. They expect us to abide by the Constitution of the United States of America. They expect us to stand up and tell this President that this illegal war must come to an end once and for all.

Vote ``yes'' on this War Powers Resolution, and let the American people know that we will not be altered from doing our job.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.