On the recordMarch 4, 2026
I have been listening closely to this debate since it began. The arguments being made by half of the Representatives of the people of the United States, the arguments as to why they should abrogate their constitutionally mandated duty, are bizarre to me. Most of the arguments have not been arguments. The arguments are that Iran is evil, that they hate the U.S., and that they mean us ill. The majority will find no argument over here that that is true. Oddly enough, when the Founders wrote the Constitution, they didn't say we shall declare war only when it is not clear that the belligerent is evil or means us ill. It was a categorical demand that the Representatives of the people, because blood and treasure would be consumed, that the Representatives of the people not just be informed but that they provide authorization. I have heard the majority say that the danger was imminent. I am the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee. I can say with authority that, in the last 10 years, Iran's ability to create mayhem, while still very substantial, is at an ebb. The President himself said the nuclear capabilities were 'obliterated,' his word. Hezbollah has been largely rolled up in Beirut by the Lebanese Armed Forces. We have a pretty good sense of what the Houthis are capable of and how to counter them. If the argument is imminence, that is absurd.
Source
govinfo.gov




