Motion to Discharge--S.J. Res. 59

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, the Constitution is clear: Congress, not the President, has the authority to declare war. The Founders were unanimous in proclaiming that the power to declare war belonged exclusively to Congress.

James Madison, the father of the Constitution, said that the executive branch was the branch most prone to war; therefore, the Constitution, ``with studied care, vested that power in the legislature.''

Madison would further state that ``in no part of the Constitution is more wisdom to be found than in the clause which confides the question of war and peace to the legislature, and not to the executive [branch].''

Hamilton, who didn't always agree with Madison or Jefferson, wrote that ``the Legislature can alone declare war, can alone . . . transfer the nation from a state of Peace to a state of War,'' and ``if the Legislature have a right to make war on the one hand--it is on the other [hand] the duty of the Executive to preserve Peace til war is declared.''

Madison and Hamilton had very different visions of Executive power. Yet they both agreed that it was vitally important to entrust the power to declare war to Congress, not the executive branch.

George Washington remarked that ``the Constitution vests the power of declaring war with Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject, and authorized such a measure.'' No offensive expedition without congressional approval.

St. George Tucker, a Revolutionary War-era law professor, wrote in 1803 of how our Constitution diverged from the English tradition.

He wrote:

In England the right of making war is in the King. . . . With us, the representatives of the people, have the right to decide this important question.

It is without question that Congress neither deliberated nor authorized the recent offensive military action against Iran.

Each of us has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution. Deferring the decision as to when, where, and why the country goes to war to any President is a dereliction of duty on the part of Congress.

To commit America's military to fight wars on behalf of the Nation is the most consequential and humbling responsibility that Congress is entrusted with. If we are to ask our young men and women to fight and potentially give their lives, then we in this body can at least muster the courage to debate if American military intervention is warranted.

Washington's record of involvement in the Greater Middle East is particularly abysmal, with dozens of campaigns costing thousands of American lives and trillions of dollars. Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Pakistan, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, and now Iran--all countries in the region that the United States has bombed or is bombing. In each case, the hawks in Washington were adamant that U.S. military intervention would lead to a glorious future and great peace. Instead, after tragically losing thousands of lives and trillions of dollars, the United States is not in a better strategic position thanks to our interventions.

After September 11, a generation of brave Americans answered the call to serve, many enduring multiple deployments in the region. Some 7,000 U.S. servicemembers paid the ultimate sacrifice in the War on Terror. Tens of thousands more carry with them the scars of war: living with missing limbs, shrapnel, nerve damage, brain injuries, burns, scars. Some live with paralysis and are confined to wheelchairs. The mental wounds of war are also present as we remember the more than 30,000 veterans who have committed suicide since Washington's misguided project to remake the Middle East.

While our soldiers carry out their missions with honor, the Washington establishment consistently fails them. In almost all cases, our interventions were counterproductive, making us less safe and less prosperous.

As the initial jubilation wears off from those who clamor for war, the regional situation remains precarious, and American servicemembers remain in danger. Many advocates for war, giving voice to their real feelings, have loudly opposed the current cease-fire. Those arguing against a cease-fire give a callous testimony, insensitive to the cruelties of war.

Some 40,000 U.S. troops are scattered throughout the Middle East as we speak--some on large, established bases, others on isolated outposts. It is impossible to ensure all of these locations have adequate air and missile defense capabilities.

Our troop presence in the region is therefore a significant liability, allowing Iran and its proxies an opportunity to target Americans, which they otherwise would not have. Yet the Washington foreign policy establishment seems content to allow our servicemembers to serve as sitting ducks. Should American soldiers get wounded or, God forbid, killed in a retaliatory strike, the calls for war emanating from Washington will surely be deafening.

History is replete with examples of leaders who, in their hubris, thought they could shape the fate of nations, but we are subsequently proven wrong as events ended up controlling them. Our own country, sadly, experienced this during Vietnam.

The needless tragedy of that war in which 58,000 Americans paid the ultimate sacrifice led Congress to pass the War Powers Resolution we debate today. Congress intended to ensure a President would never again unilaterally plunge the American people into war without the people's representatives in Congress debating the issue. We owe it to all Americans who have worn the uniform to honor that humbling responsibility.

Moreover, despite the tactical success of our strikes, they may end up proving to be a strategic failure. It is unclear if this intervention will fully curtail Iran's nuclear aspirations or, in fact, whether the Iranians may well conclude to double down on their efforts to obtain a nuclear weapon. At this time, it is unknown.

The lesson Tehran and other unsavory regimes around the world may learn is that the only way to deter a strike is to maintain a nuclear deterrent. Pandora's box has been opened, and the consequences remain to be seen.

Congress must now focus its efforts on deescalation and preventing the call for regime change, the consequences of which, if applied to Iran, risk the total destabilization of the Middle East. The American people are sick and tired of sending their children to fight and die in war zones on the other side of the world with no tangible U.S. interests at stake.

Abdicating our constitutional responsibility by allowing the executive branch to unilaterally introduce U.S. troops into wars is an affront to the Constitution and to the American people.

Today's vote offers every Member of this body an opportunity to stand up for the Constitution, to stand up for American servicemembers, and to stand up for America's strategic interests. I will vote in support of this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do so as well.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source