[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 114 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 114

Urging Congress to debate and vote on a statutory authorization for any 
         sustained United States combat role in Iraq or Syria.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 11, 2014

  Mr. Grijalva (for himself, Mr. Ellison, and Ms. Lee of California) 
 submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to 
                    the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION


 
Urging Congress to debate and vote on a statutory authorization for any 
         sustained United States combat role in Iraq or Syria.

Whereas Congress has a constitutional duty, enshrined in article I, section 8, 
        clause 11 of the United States Constitution, to debate and examine the 
        significant consequences of another multi-year United States military 
        intervention in the Middle East;
Whereas the War Powers Resolution provides that 60 days after the President 
        informs Congress that he has introduced Armed Forces into an overseas 
        theater, the President ``shall terminate any use of United States Armed 
        Forces'' unless Congress has authorized such use of the Armed Forces;
Whereas the United States military has engaged in over 100 airstrikes in Iraq 
        since August 8, 2014;
Whereas currently there are over 1,000 United States military personnel deployed 
        in Iraq;
Whereas the United States military has flown surveillance sorties over Syria to 
        collect information on the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS);
Whereas the Obama administration has stated that the Authorization for Use of 
        Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243) is 
        obsolete and has supported its repeal;
Whereas the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) should 
        not apply to ISIS because ISIS has no operational connection to al Qaeda 
        or the Taliban and is not currently considered an ``associated force'' 
        of al Qaeda;
Whereas any new authorization for the use of military force should be narrowly 
        tailored and limited;
Whereas ISIS is a violent extremist organization that has terrorized and 
        committed unconscionable atrocities against religious and ethnic 
        minority communities in the course of attempting to create a de-facto 
        state within the borders of Iraq and Syria;
Whereas the threat posed by ISIS requires a robust response from a broad 
        international coalition, with regional partners playing prominent and 
        leading roles;
Whereas Congress should support a comprehensive strategy for defeating ISIS that 
        cuts off access to ISIS supplies and financial resources and isolates 
        extremist elements by addressing the legitimate political grievances and 
        aspirations of local religious and ethnic communities in Iraq and Syria;
Whereas this issue should be immediately referred to and debated by the United 
        Nations Security Council;
Whereas the House of Representatives passed House Concurrent Resolution 105 on 
        July 25, 2014, by a vote of 370-40; and
Whereas House Concurrent Resolution 105 expressed the sense of Congress that the 
        President shall not deploy or maintain United States Armed Forces in a 
        sustained combat role in Iraq without statutory authorization: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That Congress--
            (1) should debate and vote on a statutory authorization for 
        any sustained United States combat role in Iraq or Syria;
            (2) does not support the deployment of ground combat troops 
        in Iraq or Syria;
            (3) should ensure that any such statutory authorization is 
        narrowly tailored and limited; and
            (4) should ensure that any statutory authorization includes 
        robust reporting requirements.
                                 <all>