On the recordMay 25, 2011
I think the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes) raises the right questions. And definitely, we do need to go after these folks militarily. Clearly, it would also be better if Congress spoke. But where I disagree with him is on the question of whether or not this goes too far and expands that authority. And I do very strongly disagree with the arguments of Mr. West from Florida. The President does have the authority. He had the authority to do the bin Laden raid, as Mr. Amash just pointed out, within the existing branch of authority. I do want to compliment the chairman of this committee for his hard work in working on this issue. I think it would be an important thing for the Armed Services Committee, for this Congress to speak on what the authorization of use of military force should be beyond just linking it back to 9/11. But when you put in associated forces, and when you don't have any end date, it does confer upon the President the potential for a great deal of power over a long period of time. And it is important to point out the President right now, forget the original AUMF, the President under just the interpretation of the Constitution and laws of this country absent of that has a great deal of authority. Let's remember President Clinton was the first person to take a shot at Osama bin Laden back in 1998, when we launched cruise missiles at a compound where we thought he was in Afghanistan. There was no AUMF at that point.…





