Eliot Engel

Mr. ENGEL

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

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume for the purpose of closing. Madam Speaker, in 2002, the House authorized the Bush administration to go to war the Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq. It makes no sense that this authorization is still on the books when the original purpose of it has long passed. It is dangerous when we see an administration trying to claim that this decades-old vote gives them a green light to conduct military actions against Iran. With this measure today, there is no blank check for war. The President must come to the Congress. We want to fill our constitutional role. Only Congress can declare war, not the President. With this measure today, we can finally reclaim Congress' constitutional role in war powers and repeal this outdated authorization that has been misused time and time and time again. As my friend from Texas knows, the 2001 9/11 AUMF is cited as the authority for every operation against terrorists in Iraq. This AUMF needs to be updated and limited. The 2002 Iraq war AUMF does not need to be updated; it just needs to be repealed. What we are saying here is that there should be no automatic blank check for war. If this President or future Presidents want to go to war, they must come to Congress. Only Congress can declare war. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this, no blank check for war. If war is necessary, it will happen, but it shouldn't be a blank check for Presidents to go to war. We want peace; we don't want war; and now is the time to show it. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, last week, I went with Speaker Pelosi and some other Members of Congress to Jerusalem, where we had the commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the end of the death camps. Many of our colleagues went to Auschwitz-Birkenau to look at the concentration camps. Some of my colleagues have said this, but I think it is important that each one of us says it: We have to raise our voices loudly and clearly and monitor the situation so these types of things don't happen again to any people. First of all, anti-Semitism is rearing its ugly head, and certainly we need to do everything we can to stop the scourge of anti-Semitism. We cannot treat people the way the Jewish population was treated during the Second World War, and America must always be in the forefront of equal rights and standing up against injustice. I wanted to take the time to say that participating in that conference was really emotional for me, and I think that we should always say: Never again will we stand idly by and allow anti-Semitism to rear its ugly head. Never again will we stand idly by and allow any group of people to be killed and slaughtered. So, never again.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I rise to speak in favor of H.R. 943, the Never Again Education Act. Monday, we recognized International Holocaust Remembrance Day, which marks 75 years since the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp. The Holocaust is a crime without parallel. And how we deal with its memory defines us as a people and as a country. As we look back at one of the darkest chapters in history, it is also our duty to look forward. Antisemitism is on the rise and hatred and intolerance seem to spread unchecked. This cannot stand. As we honor the memory of those who came before us, we must recommit ourselves to securing a bright future for the next generation. To ensure this, we must continue to educate younger generations on the atrocities of the Holocaust and how it could occur. That is why I strongly support H.R. 943. It is critical that the Department of Education provide the funds needed for schools to implement Holocaust education programs into their curriculum, so students understand the history of the Holocaust. I urge the Senate to pass this bill immediately.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 752, a resolution supporting human rights and fundamental freedoms in Iran. Today, we send a vital message to the protest movement in Iran that--as they face persecution and violence--the House of Representatives stands in solidarity with them. For decades, the Iranian regime has oppressed dissidents. From the 1988 massacre to the 2009 protests to today, people who dared to speak against the Iranian regime has been subject to torture, arrest, disappearance and worse. Iran's prisons are some of the most notorious in the world. The protests have escalated since the Iranian regime lied to the world about their responsibility for shooting down the Ukrainian jetliner. It is unfathomable that for three days, the Iranian regime sought to hide their culpability. The United States must do what we can to help support those who fight for human rights and freedom in Iran. This resolution outlines some important steps, including expanding internet access for Iranian dissidents by easing the restrictions on sharing software and hardware for personal communication devices. I would also add that if the Trump administration wants to send a message of solidarity to the Iranian protest movement, they should repeal the ill-conceived Muslim ban, which has prevented Iranians from visiting and studying in America. The American people have no quarrel with the people of Iran. America should welcome those Iranians who want to see America for themselves. I'd like to thank Mr. Deutch and Mr. Wilson for spearheading this important resolution.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the passage of H.J. Res. 76, a resolution to overturn Secretary DeVos' shameful borrower defense rule. Secretary DeVos claims her rule is to help students and to protect taxpayers, but this rule does the complete opposite. Instead of working on behalf of students that have been defrauded by predatory for-profit colleges, Secretary DeVos seeks to protect those bad actors who leave students with crushing debt and worthless degrees. Secretary DeVos refuses to provide relief to defrauded students, eliminates consumer protections and higher education, and weakens safeguards to prevent low quality schools from receiving taxpayer money. Mr. Speaker, that is why I was proud to vote for and help pass H.J. Res. 76 to overturn Secretary DeVos' anti-student rule, and I urge prompt action by the full Senate.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 781, I call up the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 83) directing the President pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces to engage in hostilities in or against Iran, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 83, currently under consideration.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We are here this afternoon so that this body can exercise one of its most important constitutional responsibilities, deciding on whether or not this country will wage war, whether or not we will check an executive that has brought our country to a dangerous brink. In recent months, tensions between the United States and Iran have ticked up, bit by bit, until this last week, when we found ourselves in a crisis like we haven't seen in decades. Let's be clear: The Iranians are responsible for their own harmful behavior. We know this is a regime that underwrites terrorism, that tries to strengthen its own position by fomenting instability and provocation. We know that about Iran. No one expects Iran to be the adult in the room when it comes to global affairs. What we do expect is that American leadership and American policy will be the moderating force. So the world was stunned last week when the Trump administration chose, instead, the path towards escalation with the killing of Qasem Soleimani. We need to be honest about Soleimani. He was a bad guy. He had masterminded attacks and campaigns that cost thousands of innocent lives. In the places where we have seen Iran's most harmful activity, Soleimani's fingerprints were everywhere. He had American blood on his hands, and the world is better off without him. But are we really safer today, as the administration claims, with American citizens told to get out of Iraq as fast as they can; thousands of troops deploying to the Middle East; an eviction notice from the Iraqi Government, whose partnership we depend on in the fight against ISIS; Iranian missiles endangering American personnel? It certainly doesn't feel like we are safer, and a poll out today shows that the American people agree. In foreign policy, you have to weigh decisions like this. As awful as Soleimani was, this action has endangered American lives and American security. The President and his advisers say they had no choice; that there was imminent threat. Then they said, well, he had done bad things in the past and was going to do more bad things in the future. When they sent a report on the strike to Congress, the administration took the highly unusual step of classifying it. And then yesterday, in a classified briefing, when Members demanded to see the evidence that justified the strike, the message from the administration essentially boiled down to this: Trust us. When we asked, What is the plan going forward? The administration essentially told Members: Trust us. Trust us is not good enough, Madam Speaker, not for me, and not for the American people. Madam Speaker, if they are going to send our men and women in uniform into harm's way, they shouldn't hide the facts. First of all, this administration hasn't given us any reason to believe that this is a fact. The foreign policy of this administration has undermined American leadership, cut our diplomats off at the knees, alienated our allies, and walked away from our obligations. We have lurched from crisis to crisis, each time hoping that the situation won't spin out of control. I call it fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants foreign policy, and it is no way to advance American interests and values on the global stage. But beyond that, beyond the way this administration has acted, it is not the job of Congress to give any administration its blind trust. It is why we have separation of powers. It is why the Constitution entrusts war powers to Congress. Let me say that again. It is why the Constitution entrusts war powers to Congress. We haven't had a declared war in this country since World War II. It is not the way it should happen. So it is a relief that both the administration and the Iranians have, for the moment, opted to de-escalate. But we would be foolish to think this crisis is over. It could flame up again in the blink of an eye, and I worry that another misstep on either side could be what plunges our country into another ill-advised war in the Middle East. I will say it very plainly: The American people do not want war with Iran. With the measure before us today, we are denying the President the authority to wage such a war. This would direct the President to terminate the use of armed force against Iran without congressional authorization unless it is necessary to respond to an imminent armed attack against the United States. The President always has the power to defend America. No one denies that. This resolution explicitly preserves this right, but that is a limited exception. The President shouldn't abuse it. Now, we have heard the argument that the 2002 Authorization for the Use of Military Force, the Iraq war authorization, would justify military action against Iran. That is just wrong. It is not what Congress intended when it passed that resolution. I was here. I remember it. It should be repealed, not used to launch more military action. If the President wants to use military force against Iran, he has to come to Congress. Any President has to come to Congress. We are not making rules only for this President. We are making rules for the President, any President, vis-a-vis, Congress' constitutional powers. The President has to make the case first, first, not after he launches an ill-advised attack, then after the fact, comes up with a reason why it was necessary and why it was legal. That is not the way our system works. Today, I have heard the myth floating around that this resolution is nonbinding; that it is just symbolic. So let me quote from the War Powers Act to prove that untrue. The War Powers law says: ``At any time that United States Armed Forces are engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States, its possessions and territories without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be removed by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution.'' Again, by concurrent resolution. That is what the War Powers Act states that we need do. That is what we are doing today. This is the House of Representatives exercising its Article I authority. We don't get authority over war powers just because--if the President says so. We get authority over war powers, period. That is our authority. So let's put that fiction to rest. And one final point, Madam Speaker, about the tone of this debate. Yesterday, a Member of this body went on television and said that Democrats ``are in love with terrorists. They mourn Soleimani more than they mourn our Gold Star families.'' Another Member labeled a group of colleagues ``Ayatollah sympathizers.'' At a time when we are talking about policy that will have direct bearing on American men and women, servicemembers and diplomats in harm's way, comments like that reflect very poorly on this body. And I remind the House that all Members, in both parties, regardless of party, love this country. These words have no place in this debate. On the Foreign Affairs Committee, we take pride in debating issues, even the toughest issues, on the merits and on the facts. I salute my friend, the ranking member, Mr. McCaul, for working so closely with me to make sure we do so. That is one of the keys of the Foreign Affairs Committee. I strongly encourage all Members on both sides to bear that in mind during this debate. We all take the same oath. We can argue about this resolution without questioning one another's motives or one another's patriotism. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Slotkin), the author of this important resolution.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I am sorry that the Republican leader is casting aspersions. I think everyone on both sides of the aisle takes this seriously and has reasons for what we are voting on. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Khanna), a gentleman who has been very involved in these issues for a long, long time and has been a real leader in these issues.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman.

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

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentlewoman.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), a valuable member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman), a longtime valued member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), a valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I now yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Keating), a valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, the chair of the Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, Energy, and the Environment.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. Omar).

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Trone), a valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, let me remind my friend that we, too, cherish our military and also have their backs. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), chairwoman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Espaillat), an esteemed member the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).