[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 103 (Wednesday, June 19, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H4777-H4778]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 FUNDING FOR WAR AND THE WAR POWERS ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Sherman) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, we spent many hours in this Chamber talking 
about the amendments to the appropriations bill, this combination of 
several appropriations bills, that we will pass later this week.
  What I would like to take a minute to talk about is an amendment I 
didn't offer because we got the material in the base text.
  Our Constitution creates a tension between Article I and Article II 
when it comes to the power to wage war: the Commander in Chief on the 
one hand versus the authority of Congress to declare war on the other.
  Thomas Jefferson determined that it was necessary to get the approval 
of Congress before he deployed Marines to the shores of Tripoli, our 
first non-declared war, our first intervention in the Middle East, and 
a precedent that should have been followed by subsequent Presidents.
  But in fact, since the days of Jefferson, on many occasions, 
Presidents just sent our troops in without seeking authority from 
Congress. That is why in 1973, in the wake of the Vietnam war, this 
Congress passed the War Powers Act, also known as the War Powers 
Resolution. It provides that the President cannot deploy for more than 
60 or 90 days without an authorization to use military force.
  Now, that act of 1973 is not everything it should be because it did 
not encompass the idea of bombing without deploying troops for periods 
of 60 or 90 days. It is unclear, perhaps. It is in need of revision, 
perhaps, but it is the only legal restraint on a President committing 
us to war without any approval from this Congress.
  But every Attorney General since the 1970s has advised Presidents 
that the War Powers Act isn't actually binding on them, that a 
President can send unlimited troops into battle for an unlimited period 
for any purpose. This is not what should be, and yet many 
constitutional scholars agree with these provisions, with this 
interpretation. That is

[[Page H4778]]

why the provision that we have in this appropriations bill is so 
important.
  I want to commend the subcommittee and the full committee for 
including in the base text the provision that says no funds shall be 
used in contravention of the War Powers Act. This is a provision I 
originally proposed as an amendment on this floor in 2011. We lost the 
first time, but we ultimately prevailed, and now it is part of the base 
text. This adds the power of the purse to enforce the War Powers Act.
  I am pleased to report that Attorney General Mukasey, a Republican 
Attorney General, a strong advocate for Presidential power, testified 
before the Foreign Affairs Committee that he believes and would advise 
the President that they need not follow the War Powers Act but that 
they dare not spend a penny in contravention of the War Powers Act if 
this provision is included in the relevant appropriations bill. So I 
commend the committee for including this and assuring that any 
reasonable Attorney General will tell any President they must adhere to 
that critical 1973 act.


                             Cryptocurrency

  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, in the remaining few seconds, let me deal 
with another subject. Mark Zuckerberg has announced that he's going to 
introduce a cryptocurrency, or his plans to do so.
  The effect would be to undermine our economy by reducing the 
importance of the U.S. dollar in international transactions and to 
undermine our national security by making it easier for drug dealers, 
terrorists, and sanctions evaders to do businesses without using the 
U.S. dollar.
  I look forward to addressing this House further and to working in the 
Financial Services Committee. But it certainly concerns me that a man 
who has benefited like no other from the protection of the U.S. 
national security efforts and from the U.S. economy would undermine 
both in an effort to make even more billions.

                          ____________________