Reaffirming Iran Remains the Largest State Sponsor of Terrorism

Floor Speech

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by saying something that should not be controversial at all in this House. In fact, it has been the position of this House throughout. The Iranian regime is a malign, nefarious, and deadly actor. It has appointed terrorist groups on militias across the Middle East, slaughtered its own people, quashed dissent, and threatened Americans and our interests for decades.

Members of both sides of the aisle know this. Congress has said it many times before. In fact, during my years in Congress, this body has passed dozens of resolutions and laws recognizing Iran as the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism. There is no dispute there. This is not a dispute.

Let us be honest about what this resolution is. It is not new policy. It is not new information. It does nothing to protect a single American, servicemember, or ally. I think it is about politics. Maybe it is a stunt because of what Members are going to debate right after this. I don't think this accomplishes what Chairman Mast or the Republicans think it does, because in no way does this have any effect on the War Powers Resolution debate later today.

People can agree--and we all do--and we all know that Iran is bad. People also should agree that the President should come to Congress if he wants to make the case for war. These two truths are not incompatible.

For decades, Republicans and Democrats have worked together to counter Iran's dangerous behavior. Congress has imposed layer after layer of sanctions, disrupted terrorist financing networks, strengthened regional partnerships, and worked with our allies to constrain Iran's nuclear program.

Unfortunately, President Donald Trump has often upended or ignored bipartisan work: for example, when he pardoned the founder of Binance, an enabler of the Iran regime that allowed his company to be used to fund Iran's terror proxies.

Past efforts were designed to contain and deter Iran's threats while protecting Americans' interests in avoiding a broader regional war.

Today, Americans find ourselves in a very different situation. At President Trump's own behest, the United States is now engaged in direct military conflict with Iran, a conflict that was initiated without congressional authorization and without a clear explanation to the American people for what the endgame is.

To be clear: No one in this Chamber doubts the danger posed by the Iranian regime. Recognizing that threat does not mean abandoning our Constitution. It does not mean Congress should surrender its responsibility to debate and authorize war. It certainly does not mean we should walk blindly into a conflict with a deadly serious adversary without our own serious or clear strategy for what comes next.

The stakes here are not symbolic. They aren't talking points.

American servicemembers are in harm's way. The Middle East is on the brink of a wider conflict. The consequences of a war with Iran could shape the region--and American security--for decades.

Instead of debating yet another resolution stating something that we all already know, this body should be asking some real questions: What are the objectives of this war? What is the strategy for preventing regional escalation? What is the plan for the day after? What will this cost the American people? The American people deserve those answers, and Congress deserves a vote. Our constituents are waiting to hear.

Mr. Speaker, I made very clear that there is no disagreement in Congress that Iran is a bad actor. It is a state sponsor of terror.

I have said it over and over again in my career, and I think every Member of Congress has said it over and over again. That is really not what this concurrent resolution is really about. This resolution really is a stunt meant to try to cast a shadow on the imminent Iran War Powers Resolution debate that is going to follow this. This came up today, just at the last minute, to try to throw it in specifically because of the debate.

Both things can be true, Mr. Speaker. Congress can recognize that Iran is a bad actor, as we have done multiple times, and the President of the United States cannot unilaterally drag our country into war without congressional deliberation, debate, and authorization.

The Constitution of the United States of America says that only Congress can declare war. So that is what the next debate will be all about.

Do we want to live up to what we took an oath of office and take a vote for the American people to see where everyone stands and to be sure that we are not giving away our power to the executive branch of government and that we in Congress are going to do our job that the Constitution states that we should do?

If the Constitution wanted one person to make that decision, then it would have so stated.

Yes, I will be voting for this resolution, absolutely, 100 percent. I have voted for so many other similar resolutions over the years. However, I plan to also do my constitutional duty to take my responsibility, not to give it away to the executive branch of government and not to shrink from my responsibilities. I plan also on voting for the War Powers Resolution on Iran in the debate immediately following this resolution which we have passed numerous times in this House.

It is a stunt, but, unfortunately, that is where we are, as opposed to doing real business.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source