On the recordJune 7, 1995
I simply disagree with the way the gentleman characterizes the ultimate impact of what he is proposing. I think it really would be a default to the executive on the powers that we must hold. I think the gentleman makes a good argument for amending the Constitution, perhaps, to reflect current times. I would disagree with that step, but that is the argument he is really making. In fact, I think we need a more constitutionally subtle and discrete approach to this issue than is encompassed in his amendment, perhaps one that would be the product of a full committee hearing and deliberation process in both the Committee on International Relations and Committee on National Security. In any case, under these circumstances with this debate on this bill, I would reluctantly urge a 'no' vote on the gentleman's amendment.
Source
govinfo.gov
