On the recordMarch 27, 2017
I work very close with my friend from Kentucky. There were some awfully strong things that were just said. I don't think they were directed necessarily at me. I think there has been a little bit of an evolution here. I know that the reason we are having to go through this process of filibustering a treaty is the fact that the Senator from Kentucky wanted a vote on an unrelated amendment relative to surveillance here in our own country. When he was unable to get that agreement, he decided to filibuster a treaty. So that is what is happening here. I am interested to hear this evolution of why we are having this debate. Let me just say, having dealt with this issue firsthand--and I know he knows this--this filibuster is about something totally unrelated to the amendment that is being offered right now. I know the Senator from Kentucky, my friend, knows that I have offered authorizations for the use of force. I did so against Syria, and I am glad to have a debate on authorizations for the use of force, and I think we should. I know the administration is developing a strategy around ISIS right now, and when they complete that, it is my hope that we will, in fact, update the 2001 AUMF. I think it has been stated by past administrations that the authorization they are utilizing as it relates to ISIS is legal. I believe them to be correct.…





