On the recordJuly 13, 2017
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Cole amendment. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma for his work in pushing Congress to have a debate on an AUMF. I had offered an amendment as well to the defense bill, along with Mr. Sanford and Mr. Moulton, that would put in place a new consolidated AUMF, and I wanted to describe it. I know there has been considerable debate over whether this is the right bill for an amendment of this nature. But what we have tried to do in this language is avoid the red lines that both parties seem to have in this debate. As I perceive those red lines, my friends on the Republican side of the aisle are reluctant to--in what would be considered too restrictive a way--tie the hands of the Commander in Chief by putting limits on geography or the introduction of ground troops. On the Democratic side, we are resistant to the idea of giving the Commander in Chief too much of a blank check. The way that we have sought to navigate the distance between these two red lines is a resolution that would repeal the old authorizations which no longer really apply to our current situation, replace it with an authorization of use of force against al-Qaida, ISIS, the Taliban, and their associated forces. It would place no geographic limits and no limits on the introduction of ground forces, but it would have these necessary safeguards.…





