Does the AUMF expire by presidential declaration, congressional action, or the occurrence of an actual event in the world?

The better course is to separate the substance of a force authorization from its breadth.

the more transparency we have, the more accountability that the Federal Government has from our constituents

It is clear that if Congress retracted the AUMF, at that point the authority would come to an end, correct?

So just back to the language of the AUMF that Senator McCain read, authorizing the President, 'to use all necessary and appropriate force against all those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or…

I think it is highly important that we stress to the administration that commencing hostilities that puts American troops or materiel in harm's way in Syria without fresh congressional discussion and approval... would be enormously…

No one suggests handing the President a blank check to carry out the power to declare war.

I just do not want to walk out of this room with any doubt that at least this Senator would expect under the Constitution that an administration would come back to Congress and have that discussion.

To replace the AUMF would be risky and unwise at this time.

Congress therefore weakens not only the President but also itself when and if it declines to face up to the threats against our Nation.

The second paragraph, just very quickly, in the President's remarks, 'As we do so,' fight terrorism, 'we must enlist our values in the fight . . .'

I fully believe, in looking at this AUMF, that discussion would have to take place between the executive and Congress and could not rely on an expanded interpretation of the AUMF language.

Today the organization that attacked us on September 11 is a shadow of its former self.

Congress has to jealously guard its prerogative to commence hostilities and to decide against whom those hostilities will be commenced.

Congress absolutely does have the prerogative to set limits on the scope of the AUMF, who the enemy is, the duration, and the geographic scope.

I will tell you why. Again, I just heard it. I did not read it.

the AUMF would allow us to commence hostilities against a coalition partner, to commence hostilities against a group that had no connection to September 11

our constituents get rightly frustrated when they are going through hard times at home and they are having to adhere to a budget

I strongly believe that decisions about targeting, tactics, et cetera are for the executive.

if they cannot figure out where money is spent in Washington, then there is no accountability

the effect of actions in Syria on Iran is obviously a significant factor we ought to consider.

I rise today to talk about the continuing efforts by a minority of this body to block a Federal budget by blocking a conference with the House to find compromise. I spoke about this one week ago, but the stalemate continues. Today there…

I believe somebody is going to pull the trigger on them, and then we are all going to be sitting here wringing our hands.

I think we can give them an avenue out, but they have to decide to take it and, sadly, I do not think they have yet made that choice.

the battlefields on American soil contain our national history and commemorate the events that made our nation what it is today. Too many of these sites are open to urban development that could 1eave no trace of the sacrifices made there…