Michael McCaul

Mr. McCAUL

Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank the chairman for working with me to bring this to the floor. We passed this the last Congress, and I hope the Senate will pay attention, as this is a very important issue. In the last year alone, ISIS- and al-Qaida-affiliated terrorist attacks in the Sahel have more than doubled, killing over 4,000 people. Just two weeks ago, at least 130 civilians were killed in Burkina Faso in an attack reportedly carried out by child soldiers. This was the worst attack in that country in years. As we speak, ISIS and al-Qaida affiliates are growing in strength, they are increasing in size, they are becoming more violent, and they are pushing further south into coastal West Africa. Innocent civilians are paying the price. A military solution alone will not stabilize the Sahel. Mali has experienced two coups in a year. This is unacceptable and underscores the importance of U.S. engagement, along with our partners, to address governance challenges in the region. Without adequate attention to the root causes of extremism, violence, and community grievances, we will never meaningfully address security challenges in the Sahel. I want to thank my colleague, Representative Keating, for his support of this legislation as well as the chairman. This bill will pass again. It is time for the Senate to pass it and make it into law. This bill mandates the State Department, the Defense Department, and USAID to coordinate their efforts in the region, very similar to the Global Fragility Act we passed and signed into law. This will help balance our diplomatic, defense, and development efforts to combat instability and terrorist activity in the Sahel. The program also works with countries such as Chad, Burkina Faso, Niger, and Nigeria to build their capacity to conduct counterterrorism operations, prevent the spread of violent extremism, and strengthen the rule of law. We have learned firsthand that terrorists left unchecked and allowed to exploit safe havens will pose great threats to the United States' national security interest. The situation in the region is dire, and we cannot afford to squander critical taxpayer resources, if they are not achieving results. This really provides for congressional oversight as well of the State Department and the Department of Defense, in terms of how they are monitoring this important program. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this important measure, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman, again, and Representative Keating for their work. As we have seen around the world, COVID-19 has made an already dire situation worse in this region. As humanitarian needs are rising, forced displacement has increased and local communities are becoming more vulnerable. In June, the U.N. Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations testified to the U.N. Security Council that terrorist groups are trying to capitalize on the pandemic to undermine and destabilize governments in the Sahel. This cannot wait. I urge the administration to work with international partners to increase our engagement in the region. It is imperative we address the underlying drivers of extremism in order to truly combat rising terrorist activities. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McCAUL

Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for closing. Mr. Speaker, this is a very timely bill. We have seen utter devastation, in terms of human lives, and the economy being impacted by this. We need to ensure, Mr. Speaker, this never happens again. There will be another COVID-like virus that will be a variant. We need to work with the global community to ensure this never happens again. We also need to find out the origins of COVID-19, how this happened in the first place. Not for revenge, but to find out how it happened so we can stop it from ever happening again. I give my strong support to this important legislation. The timing couldn't be more relevant and appropriate. I thank Mr. Connolly for his leadership and the chairman for bringing this bill to the floor. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank the chairman for his leadership bringing this very timely bill to the floor. I want to thank Mr. Connolly for his leadership, and Mr. Chabot, who, I think, is trying to get here as well. COVID-19 could end up, at the end of the day, costing the global economy upwards of $10 trillion. Of course, the full impact of viruses like COVID-19 is not just measured in economic disruption around the world, but also in the millions of lives that have been lost, somewhere upwards of four million people. COVID-19 has proven viruses know no borders, as the chairman said. It is imperative the United States work to prevent future pandemics and be prepared to respond to diseases with pandemic potential. So, again, I want to thank my colleagues who have been involved in this for introducing the Global Health Security Act and for their work to address this important issue. This bill ensures a whole-of-government approach to prepare for and, hopefully, prevent future pandemics. It also establishes a new multilateral fund that will ensure all countries have access to the necessary resources to prevent and respond to future outbreaks. Our committee has a history of working together to achieve bipartisan success, but particularly on legislation related to global health. It is not Republican or Democrat. This is an American issue. It is also a human issue and an international issue. The Global Health Security Act is just yet another example of this great bipartisan work that we do and that makes me so proud to be a Member of Congress. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time

Mr. McCAUL

Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me first say I support this bill to repeal the 1991 Authorization for Use of Military Force for the first Gulf war. That law provided authority to use our military to enforce specific United Nations resolutions opposing Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait. With the success of Operation Desert Storm, the Iraqi troops were expelled from Kuwait, and combat operations concluded in early 1991, more than 30 years ago. The specific point of this law was accomplished. Therefore, there is no reason to leave it on the books. It is, in that sense, very different from the 2002 Iraq AUMF we voted on before. That authority has been used consistently since its enactment to address terrorist threats in and emanating from Iraq and was most recently used--not that authority--but we saw a strike from the President against Shia militia proxies in Iraq and Syria. Those threats continue to this day. Unfortunately, not all can be targeted using the 2001 AUMF. Real war powers reform means consulting with our military commanders and intelligence experts. It means updating Article I authorities so the President can use them to address the deadly terrorists who threaten Americans today. It does not mean repealing old AUMFs without replacing them, although for this one, we don't need to. It does not mean telling the President just to rely on Article II powers when there is no consensus about their reach. This law, which is tied to U.N. resolutions about the 1990 invasion of Kuwait, legally cannot be used to launch new military engagements in the 21st century. I support this repeal. I thank Ms. Spanberger for bringing this. This is an example of how we can work together to clean up these old AUMFs and hopefully move forward with an updated AUMF. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me just say, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Virginia (Ms. Spanberger) for bringing this repeal. It is a real step forward. I also want to thank her for her service in the intelligence community over the years, protecting this Nation from the threats that we face. I also want to thank the chairman for really exercising great leadership on this issue. I don't know the fate of the 2002 AUMF in the Senate, but I can tell you this one, it should sail. It is a very historic moment because it could be the first time in my memory that the Congress has finally reasserted its Article I authority and cleaned up very outdated, old AUMFs. I see this as a very positive day, working together as Republicans and Democrats on reasserting our congressional authorities, reasserting the fact that, under the Constitution, it is the Congress that has the power to declare war, not the President of the United States. This committee addresses nothing more grave than issues of war and peace. I think this is, again, a very historic opportunity. I know, yesterday, the President did attack Shia proxies in Iraq and Syria. I hope I can work with the chairman on updating the 2002 and 2001 AUMFs so we can repeal the 2001 and update it to what are the modern threats that we face. After all, they are over 28 years old. Many serving may not have even been born at the time those were passed by Congress. It is refreshing to see this kind of leadership from the chairman coming out of this committee. I applaud him, commend him. I commend the gentlewoman from Virginia for bringing this measure forward. I look forward to it being passed by the Senate and cleaning up, as we say, the housekeeping on the books. I also look forward to exercising our authorities moving forward. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McCAUL

Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First of all, I thank the chairman for, again, exercising our Article I constitutional responsibilities. That is what leadership is all about, and this one is very bipartisan, and again, I think historic. Because in my memory we have never done this before successfully. I also thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Meijer) for introducing this bill to repeal an aging AUMF that has never been used in the 64 years since it was enacted. Now, I have to say, Mr. Speaker, I wasn't even born when this AUMF was enacted. Just barely, though. I was born not long after that. But that is amazing as I stand here at almost 60 years old. That law gave the President authority to ``use Armed Forces to assist any Middle East nation requesting assistance against armed aggression from any country controlled by international communism.'' This unused relic of the Cold War should not be left on the books or on the shelf for a creative President to dust off and put to unexpected use. So I think we all agree, if a President was to commit U.S. troops to new hostilities in the Middle East, he or she should come to the Congress for authorization. Mr. Speaker, for that reason I support this repeal, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), the ranking member of the House Rules Committee, a man who has dedicated quite a bit of time to this issue, and I would say is one of the leaders in the House on Authorizations for Use of Military Force and the War Powers Act and reasserting Congress' role.

Mr. McCAUL

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

Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk. The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mr. McCAUL. 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.

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

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