[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 120 (Friday, September 14, 2001)]
[House]
[Pages H5681-H5683]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Tierney
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER. Is the gentleman opposed to the joint resolution?
Mr. TIERNEY. I am, in its current form, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Tierney moves to recommit the joint resolution H.J.
Res. 64 to the Committee on International Relations with
instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith
with the following amendment:
Add at the end the following new section:
SEC. 3. REPORTS TO CONGRESS; CONSULTATION.
(a) Reports.--At least once every 60 days after the date of
the enactment of this resolution, the President shall submit
to Congress a summary on the status of efforts made to carry
out this resolution.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that,
in addition to complying with subsection (a), the President
should comply with all other reporting and consultation
requirements under applicable provisions of law, including
sections 3 and 4 of the War Powers Resolution.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney) is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I join all of our colleagues and all
Americans in our sorrow for Tuesday's victims and in our outrage for
the despicable acts of cowardice which have so changed our lives.
Tonight, we show our unity; and by so doing we serve notice that we, as
a Nation, are resolved to hold accountable those responsible for
Tuesday's terrorism.
As we go forward, I do not think this Congress wants to purposely
abdicate its constitutional obligations and responsibilities. It seems
unlikely that this Congress would knowingly deny itself the information
that may well be necessary in the future in order to intelligently
carry out its work with the President in meeting their shared
responsibilities in the area of national security. Yet if we pass the
resolution tonight, without first adding the language of this motion to
recommit, I am concerned that that is precisely what might occur.
As written, the joint resolution refers to the War Powers Resolution
but
[[Page H5682]]
could arguably be read not to require more than periodic reports to
Congress, if any reports at all. Even the periodic reports could mean
at least 6-month intervals could pass without adequate knowledge by
which Congress could carry out its responsibilities.
Moreover, Mr. Speaker, successive executives have historically
challenged the constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution. By
passing this motion to recommit, we can cure that ambiguity and clarify
the record.
In 1991, then President George H. W. Bush asked Congress to authorize
his use of force, and he signed a joint resolution that included a
requirement that the President submit to Congress at least once every
60 days a summary on the status of his efforts.
{time} 2245
There is no reason why this Congress should ask for less as we join
with this President, and no reason why in the spirit of unity, and
consistent with the Constitution and the precedent set by his own
father, that this President would not sign a resolution containing
similar language.
So I move now to recommit the joint resolution to the Committee on
International Relations with instructions to report the same back to
the House forthwith in its amended form.
This is a straightforward and a simple amendment, Mr. Speaker. It
will not delay our action here tonight. It continues to unite us in
support of the President's existing authority to act to prevent future
acts of terrorism and to locate and deal appropriately with those
responsible for the tragic events of September 11. But it does clarify
that the President report the status of his efforts to carry out this
resolution. It does express our sense that as parties with a shared
constitutional responsibility, the President comply with the statutory
authority by consulting regularly with Congress and reporting every 60
days.
Whenever there exists a national emergency created by attack upon the
United States, the Constitution empowers the President, as Commander in
Chief, to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into
situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly
indicated by the circumstances.
This joint resolution reaffirms that power.
Congress and the American people want the President to be able to act
to prevent future acts of terrorism; and so it is no surprise that the
Constitution allows for such authority and no surprise that Congress
acts to restate it tonight.
We should remember that national security is a shared responsibility,
Mr. Speaker, requiring joint efforts and mutual respect by Congress and
the President. Congress is a co-equal branch of government,
specifically empowered by the Constitution, with the power to declare
war and to make all laws which will be necessary and proper for the
carrying into execution of that power.
So while we specifically have not declared war tonight, we do make a
law by which the President may engage United States Armed Forces in
action against others.
The responsibilities of Congress, I believe, Mr. Speaker, obligate us
to remain informed and to have consultation with the President
concerning any action under this resolution. Our continued ability to
act in concert as co-equal branches of government demands no less, and
our obligation to American citizens everywhere demands at least that
much.
We want to act in unison and we need the President's cooperation to
do that. As a matter of mutual respect and as a sign of unity, as well
an act of constitutional statutory compliance, Mr. Speaker, I ask that
we all vote to recommit and have it come back forthwith as amended.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion of the
gentleman from Massachusetts to recommit the pending joint resolution.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, if adopted, the motion would seek to reimpose
on the President the restrictions of the War Powers Resolution with
regard to consultation with Congress and will impose new reporting
requirements that go well beyond those contained in the War Powers
Resolution.
This is illogical because the whole point of the joint resolution we
are considering this evening is to clear away legal underbrush that
might otherwise interfere with the ability of our President to respond
to the treacherous attack on our Nation that took place 3 days ago.
Most importantly, we are stripping away the restrictions of the War
Powers Resolution.
It hardly makes sense to reimpose and, in one case, tighten the
restrictions of the War Powers Resolution, if our larger purpose is to
make it easier for the President to respond to terrorism.
In any other case, I might understand and sympathize with the
interest of the gentleman in keeping the President on a short leash as
he goes about exercising the authority we give him tonight. But this is
not any other case. This is a situation in which our Nation has been
attacked by a sinister enemy, and thousands of our fellow citizens have
been killed.
I, for one, do not want to restrain our President as he goes about
responding to this heinous attack. Many have compared the attack on
Tuesday on our Nation to Pearl Harbor. After Pearl Harbor Congress
declared war on Japan. We did not declare war subject to the
requirement that President Roosevelt consult with Congress before
sending our Armed Forces into action and periodically submit reports to
Congress on how he was dealing with Japan.
More Americans died on Tuesday than died at Pearl Harbor. Congress
should not restrain the response of President Bush to this act of
aggression any more than President Roosevelt was restrained in his
conduct of World War II.
I urge my colleagues to defeat the motion to recommit.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's motion to
recommit the pending joint resolution.
If adopted, the motion would seek to reimpose on the President the
restrictions of the War Powers Resolution with regard to consultation
with Congress, and will impose new reporting requirements that go well
beyond those contained in the War Powers Resolution. This is illogical,
because the whole point of the joint resolution we are considering this
evening is to clear away legal underbrush that might otherwise
interfere with the ability of our President to respond to the
treacherous attack on our nation that took place three days ago. Most
importantly, we are stripping away the restrictions of the War Powers
Resolution. It hardly makes sense to reimpose--and in one case
tighten--the restrictions of the War Powers Resolution if our larger
objective is to make it easier for the President to respond to
terrorism.
In any other case I might understand and sympathize with the
gentleman's interest in keeping the President on a short leash as he
goes about exercising the authority we give him tonight. But this is
not any other case; this is a situation in which our nation has been
attacked by a sinister enemy and thousands of our fellow citizens have
been killed.
I for one do not want to restrain our President as he goes about
responding to this heinous attack.
Many have compared Tuesday's attack on our nation to Pearl Harbor,
After Pearl Harbor, Congress declared war on Japan. We did not declare
war subject to the requirement that President Roosevelt consult with
Congress before sending our armed forces into action, and periodically
submit reports to Congress on how he was dealing with Japan.
More Americans died on Tuesday than died at Pearl Harbor. Congress
should not restrain President Bush's response to this act of aggression
any more than President Roosevelt was restrained in his conduct of
World War II.
I urge my colleagues to defeat the motion to recommit.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER. Without objection, the previous question is ordered on
the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The motion to recommit was rejected.
The SPEAKER. The question is on the passage of the joint resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum is not present.
[[Page H5683]]
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 420,
nays 1, not voting 10, as follows:
[Roll No. 342]
YEAS--420
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Allen
Andrews
Armey
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Baldwin
Barcia
Barr
Barrett
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Collins
Combest
Condit
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Frank
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Harman
Hart
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kerns
Kildee
Kind (WI)
Kingston
Kirk
Kleczka
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Largent
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Mascara
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mink
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Owens
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Phelps
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reyes
Reynolds
Riley
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Schaffer
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrock
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watkins (OK)
Watson (CA)
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--1
Lee
NOT VOTING--10
Ballenger
Conyers
Farr
Kilpatrick
King (NY)
Lipinski
Petri
Sanchez
Saxton
Wilson
{time} 2317
So the joint resolution was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 342 I was unavoidably
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
The SPEAKER. Pursuant to the order of the House of earlier today,
Senate Joint Resolution 23 is passed.
Without objection, a motion to reconsider Senate Joint Resolution 23
is laid on the table, and House Joint Resolution 64 is laid on the
table.
There was no objection.
____________________