Motion to Discharge--S.J. Res. 59

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MERKLEY. I appreciate the comments of my colleague from California and particularly appreciate that my colleague from Virginia Senator Kaine has proposed this War Powers Resolution, a resolution that reaffirms a basic principle: The decisions of war and peace belong under our Constitution to Congress, not to the President.

But on June 21, President Trump ordered strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities. There was no congressional authorization. There was no debate in this Chamber. There was no vote in this Chamber. The President made a unilateral decision that risked bringing the United States into another extended war in the Middle East.

That is not how our Founders designed our Nation through the architecture of the Constitution. In fact, each Member here swore an oath to uphold that Constitution that places the responsibility for declaring war upon this body, not upon the individual who sits in the Oval Office. To be sure, the President, as Commander in Chief, has the responsibility to protect the Nation from an imminent threat. But in this case, there was not an imminent threat.

First, according to our own intelligence, Iran was not pursuing a nuclear weapon. Second, even though Iran possessed a significant amount of 60- percent-enriched uranium--more than the 3 percent to 5 percent that is utilized for civilian energy--it was still not enriched to the level to build a bomb. It would have had to be enriched to 90 percent. It would have had to be converted to metallic form. It would have had to be arranged with an extensive system of explosives that compress it in order to start a chain reaction. That is a very difficult engineering feat. Third, prior to the U.S. strikes, Israel's Foreign Minister said Israel's attacks had already set back Iran's nuclear weapon program for at least 2 to 3 years.

So let's be clear, the threat was not imminent. It was not a situation where there was no time for the President to observe the Constitution, to honor the Constitution, to seek an authorization for the use of military force from the Congress of the United States.

The administration, instead, acted precipitously, putting American lives at risk, including the over 40,000 U.S. troops in the region, as well as diplomats and American civilians stationed or visiting the Middle East.

Wars are easy to start, but they are often hard to end, and the consequences can be enormous. Look, for example, at the cost of the wars in Afghanistan and in Iraq: more than 7,000 deaths of American men and women serving in uniform, more than 50,000 serious injuries--often life-altering injuries--to America's sons and daughters serving in uniform, more than $8 trillion of American treasure spent.

That is why the Founders said the consequences of conflict, of entering into war, are so significant they must never be entrusted to a single person, not even the person who sits in the Oval Office. That is why they wrote the Constitution, placing the responsibility for that here where it can be wrestled with; where it can be debated; where different perspectives can be brought to bear; where experts can be interviewed; and all can be taken into account in making such an important decision for our Nation.

From where we are right now, two things need to happen: First, Congress needs to reassert its constitutional authority over matters of war and peace; second, we need to double down on diplomacy to secure a lasting peace.

And a lasting peace includes at least three elements: Iran does not develop a nuclear weapon; second, Iran stops funding militias across the region; and, third, Iran's economy is freed up to prosper. Those are the three elements that need to be addressed.

Let me begin, first, by addressing in some greater detail Congress's need to reassert its constitutional authority. On ``Meet the Press'' on Sunday, Senator Lindsey Graham said:

You can't have 535 Commanders in Chief.

He is exactly right. And that is why the Founders designed the Constitution with a separation of powers. Congress has the responsibility to decide if we go to war, and then the President commands our military to go to war.

Article I gives Congress the power to declare a war and article II gives the President the power to be the Commander in Chief to execute the war. Senator Kaine's War Powers Resolution says hostilities in Iran must be explicitly authorized by Congress, but that does not, in any way, prevent the United States from defending itself from an imminent attack should that need arise.

This is a privileged resolution, meaning that we will have the opportunity to wrestle with it. And we will be voting on whether to do so later today.

This resolution is urgently needed. We are already in the throes of a slide into an authoritarian state. Our President has been ignoring the Constitution or violating the Constitution by violating the rule of law that applies to the executive branch; by ignoring or suppressing or circumventing due process, the very issue that protects all of us from an overbearing Executive. In fact, it is the defender of our freedom; third, stiff-arming the courts; and, fourth, seizing Congress's power of the purse.

And then just this week, it was reported that Trump will limit intelligence sharing with Congress, another brazen attempt to centralize powers in the executive in a strongman Presidency.

With this resolution, Senator Kaine's resolution, Congress can reassert its constitutional authority as a coequal branch of government. It can stop this President from seizing even more dangerously unaccountable power.

In addition to Congress taking this action, there is an urgent need for diplomacy in order to secure a lasting peace in the Middle East. That lasting peace includes the three elements that I mentioned: that Iran does not have the path to developing a nuclear weapon; that it stops funding militias across the region; and that Iran's economy is freed up to prosper. They can reenter international commerce.

It is already clear that diplomacy is not just essential but that it is effective. In 2015, the United States helped negotiate the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, better known as the Iran nuclear deal, which blocked all paths for Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. It blocked the plutonium path; it blocked the uranium path; it blocked the covert path.

That deal was so important for global security that it involved the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom, and France, all working together to create that framework in partnership with Iran. And Iran accepted massive inspections and oversight from the International Atomic Energy Agency to make sure that you not only had an act of trust, but lots of acts of verification. The deal worked. Iran was not developing a nuclear weapon. Instead, they dismantled their plutonium- based Arak heavy water reactor. They agreed not to enrich uranium beyond 6.7 percent, and they didn't do so. They shipped all of their more highly enriched uranium out of the country--some 25,000 pounds--to be stored abroad.

But 3 years later, President Trump tore up that agreement. He did so over the objections of his own national security officials; over the objection of his Secretary of Defense General Jim Mattis; over the objection of his Secretary of State Rex Tillerson; over the objection of his National Security Advisor General McMaster; and over the objection of his Chief of Staff General John Kelly.

Had President Trump, in his first administration, not torn up that agreement, we would be celebrating Iran's tenth anniversary under the nuclear deal with no path to a nuclear weapon. By ripping up the Iran nuclear deal, Trump opened the pathway for Iran to enrich beyond 3.67 percent, leading to the concerns that prompted Israel to attack Iran's nuclear facilities and that led Prime Minister Netanyahu to ask President Trump to use our planes and our abilities to bomb Isfahan, Natanz, and Fordo.

To create an enduring agreement now that stops Iran from having a path to a nuclear weapon, restrictions like those that were in the Iran nuclear deal back in 2015 have to be recreated. And, in fact, we learned over the last few days how diplomats from President Trump's team have been working on this, were in conversation with Iran before Israel's attack to create such an arrangement. In fact, they continued those conversations even as bombs were dropping.

We have to succeed to put in place a permanent, detailed, enforceable plan for peace which Iran agrees to, that stops funding for militias outside Iran and blocks all those paths to a nuclear weapon.

Colleagues, we wouldn't be here today discussing this if President Trump hadn't torn up the first agreement that was working against the advice of his entire foreign affairs and security staff. That is what happens when you scoff at diplomacy--diplomacy that works, agreements that worked--and unleash events in the world that lead to circumstances that realized themselves this year in 2025.

The decision to strike Iran without authorization from Congress was wrong because there wasn't the imminent threat and, thus, there was time to go through the process of seeking authorization for the use of military force necessitated by our Constitution.

Wars are easy to start, but they are hard to end, and that is why the Founders wanted us to debate them before the American people. We must reassert Congress's congressional authority. We must double down on diplomacy to secure long-term peace. We cannot allow our servicemembers in uniform to be sent to war if we are not even willing to debate and vote on that war.

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source