[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 123 (Tuesday, July 18, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H3662-H3664]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




RELATING TO A NATIONAL EMERGENCY DECLARED BY THE PRESIDENT ON FEBRUARY 
                                25, 2011

  Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of July 
13, 2023, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 70) relating to a 
national emergency declared by the President on February 25, 2011, and 
ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of July 
13, 2023, the joint resolution is considered read.
  The text of the joint resolution is as follows:

                              H.J. Res. 70

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That, 
     pursuant to section 202 of the National Emergencies Act (50 
     U.S.C. 1622), the national emergency declared by the finding 
     of the President on February 25, 2011, in Executive Order 
     13566 is hereby terminated.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The joint resolution shall be debatable for 
30 minutes equally divided among and controlled by Representative 
McCaul of Texas, Representative Meeks of New York, and Representative 
Gosar of Arizona, or their respective designees.
  The gentleman from New York (Mr. Lawler), the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Meeks), and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar) each will 
control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lawler).
  Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution.
  H.J. Res. 70 would terminate Executive Order No. 13566, which 
established a state of emergency in Libya due to Qadhafi's attacks on 
his own people, a deterioration of security in Libya, and prolonged 
violence that caused serious destabilization.
  This executive order was enacted during the first Libyan civil war, 
was kept in place throughout the second Libyan civil war, and remains 
critical now as Libya has yet to make a transition to stable governing.
  On each annual renewal of the emergency, President Obama, President 
Trump, and now President Biden have carefully reviewed the 
circumstances in Libya and each time determined that we need to 
maintain associated sanctions. It is simple to see the issues in Libya 
are ongoing, and it is not partisan to know sanctions are a key 
element.
  One of the most critical sanctions that would be removed if Congress 
passed this joint resolution is against Saif Qadhafi, one of Qadhafi's 
sons, who has well-known links to the Wagner Group and is wanted for 
murdering Libyan civilians. Sanctions related to Libya are still, to 
this day, critical to our national security.
  In the last 2 years alone, our Libya sanctions have blocked 
approximately $18 million from reaching hostile foreign actors. The 
forced termination of the national emergency regarding Libya would lead 
to the immediate release of millions of dollars for wanted war 
criminals backed by the Kremlin, like Saif Al Islam Qadhafi. Again, 
this money would empower Putin's regime and secure Russia's interests 
in Libya, a strategically important country along NATO's southern 
flank.
  I also, again, want to mention the importance of the U.S. state-
sponsored terrorism fund. There is no question that this money is 
better served by helping 9/11 families than quite literally financing 
terrorists. Like most Americans, I remember exactly where I was when I 
heard the news. I was in my first week of classes as a freshman at 
Suffern High School.
  September 11 had a profound impact on our Nation, but particularly 
impacted the residents of New York. Thousands of families have faced 
the repercussions of that day, especially the families of those who 
worked tirelessly on the pile, trying to find survivors and helping 
others find closure.
  Every September 11, I attend numerous 9/11 ceremonies with the 
families and our first responders who sacrificed so much, and still 
today we are adding names to the various monuments of 9/11 first 
responders who are losing their lives to 9/11-related illnesses. These 
sanctioned moneys are used to help them and their families.
  We will never forget that tragedy, and it is abhorrent that any of 
these resolutions are coming before us today in this manner.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J. Res. 70.
  For decades, Muammar Qadhafi ruled Libya with an iron fist and with a 
corrupt, self-serving economic policy that stunted Libya's development 
and, through a security state, engaged in international terrorism, 
including the Lockerbie airline bombing that remains the deadliest 
event in aviation history.

                              {time}  1430

  For the past 12 years, Libya has seen its share of continuous turmoil 
and

[[Page H3663]]

chaos. To the extent this resolution is a symptom of frustration about 
ongoing problems in Libya, that would be understandable. Any notion 
that this resolution will be at all useful for Libya policy is deeply 
misguided.
  The United States actively supports the U.N.'s efforts to unify the 
country and its institutions under a democratically elected government.
  These talks are ongoing, and violence has decreased over the last 
several years. The economy is doing better in part because U.S. 
sanctions have helped decrease oil banditry.
  Lifting sanctions on the worst actors in Libya, the individuals who 
have perpetuated violence and instability, would send the exact wrong 
message to those pursuing economic reform.
  Whereas economic pressure and tough diplomacy have brought parties to 
the table, a free pass on sanctions would have the exact opposite 
impact.
  In general, there have been two large batches of sanctions under the 
Libya executive order. The Obama administration issued the first 
tranche against the Qadhafi family and its fiefdom of business and fake 
charities.
  The Trump administration issued the second set that sanctioned 
individuals who committed grave human rights abuses and prevented the 
theft of Libyan oil by pirates and illegal merchants.
  It is unclear to me how letting any of these people access American 
finance would be beneficial to the United States or to Libya or to the 
MENA region.
  One of the most notable people currently sanctioned under the program 
is Qadhafi's son, Saif al-Islam Qadhafi. When the protests began, Saif 
al-Islam went on television and threatened ``rivers of blood'' if the 
protestors did not cease.
  He has never condemned his father. He has never condemned his 
father's despotic rule and is actively seeking to regain power in Libya 
as we speak.
  The Qadhafi family controlled billions of dollars in assets. If 
sanctions are lifted on the remaining members of the Qadhafi family, 
the Qadhafis would have access to a windfall of wealth, which they 
plundered from the Libyan people. Instead of the frozen funds going to 
the Libyan people, they would go to the family that imprisoned and 
impoverished them.
  I cannot support anything like that outcome, Mr. Speaker. I must 
strongly oppose and hope all of the Members of this House opposes H.J. 
Res. 70.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, let's review the facts. There are currently 
41 national emergencies that are subject to periodic congressional 
review, including the emergency declaration related to Libya, which is 
more than a decade old.
  The National Emergencies Act mandates Congress consider joint 
resolutions terminating national emergencies at least every 6 months. 
Think about it; every 6 months. That is our job--not the President's; 
our job.
  Yet, Congress has never, not even once, reviewed the legitimacy of 
the national emergency related to Libya since its declaration by 
President Obama in 2011, nor has Congress reviewed any of the national 
emergencies debated today as required by law.
  Almost comically, the extended national emergency related to Libya 
still cites Muammar Qadhafi as a reason for declaration. Mr. Speaker, 
Muammar Qadhafi has been dead for almost 12 years. You can't make this 
stuff up.
  The situation in Libya poses no extraordinary threat to the national 
security or foreign policy of the United States. Once again, temporary 
measures, short-term, punch, terminate.
  No group or person in Libya currently poses a threat to our national 
security. Furthermore, even if there was some hostility, none rises to 
the level of an unusual and extraordinary threat to national security.
  To the extent that there is a desire for certain sanctions, they can 
be applied without these national emergency declarations in compliance 
with the Constitution, Federal laws, and national security needs.
  Now, that is an important point here. We can adjust these. We can put 
these in in different places that adhere to our Constitution, our legal 
aspect, because once again, this is us.
  Despite unfounded concerns, sanctioned individuals and entities can 
be redesignated pursuant to other authorities available to the 
President, including but not limited to existing national emergencies 
related to terrorism, Russia, and Iran.
  National emergencies are supposed to be rare and brief. In passing 
the National Emergencies Act in 1976, Congress did not intend for the 
executive to utilize declarations for decades in order to apply 
sanctions. That is something Congress can do separately from a national 
emergency declaration.
  In fact, let's look at the history of the National Emergencies Act. 
It was written to respond to FDR and to Truman in keeping the country 
in a state of emergency as part of their daily governance. That is what 
they used the national emergencies for.
  Congress allowing these tyrannical authorities to remain in place is 
recklessly endangering our Republic, checks and balances, and the civil 
liberties of our constituents.
  Under all these extended national emergency declarations, the U.S. 
Code provides the President with an additional 135 special statutory 
powers, including: Testing chemical and biological weapons on human 
beings, including American citizens. Can you say COVID?
  Take over or shut down radio stations and U.S.-based internet 
traffic. Wow. Censorship.
  Detail members of our Armed Forces. Waive sanctions on 
confidentiality provisions related to public health services. Impose 
crippling and unconstitutional sanctions on American citizens that 
could freeze their financial assets or restrict anyone from selling 
them groceries, renting them an apartment, representing them as an 
attorney, providing dental and medical treatment, and much more--all 
without any due process supposedly afforded by the Constitution.

  Clearly the President thinks he has authority to invoke these special 
statutory powers absent an executive order explicitly detailing them, 
which is why he announced his intention to forgive student loans via a 
press release instead of an executive order.
  Oh, but voila. The U.S. Supreme Court said: You can't do that. What 
does this President do again? He turns around and does it again, 
shoving it in the Court's face.
  Under the extended national emergency declarations, Congress 
abdicates control over policy and spending and instead transfers 
unfettered power to the executive branch.
  For example, despite repeated bicameral requests, Biden has never 
provided a single expenditure report related to the COVID-19 national 
emergency declaration as required periodically by law. Not one.
  Now, how can we, Congress, with the explicit power of the purse, 
allow any President to spend money without requiring a report?
  Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution 
says: ``No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence 
of Appropriations made by law; and a regular Statement and Account of 
the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published 
from time to time.''
  Further, 50 U.S.C. 1641(c) clearly states: `` . . . the President 
shall transmit to Congress, within 90 days after the end of each 6-
month period after such declaration, a report on the total expenditures 
incurred by the United States Government during such 6-month period . . 
.''
  Despite repeated--and I said repeated requests--there have been no 
expenditure reports to this date allocated in the COVID-19 national 
emergency, nor was there a final report that was due on July 9.
  In fact, what we heard is this President realized that he was behind 
the gun, and he actually rushed it through on July 7, had the Secretary 
of Health and Human Services actually try to do it for him. What a 
shame.
  The Constitution clearly provides Congress with the power of the 
purse, not the President, regardless of supposed emergencies. These 
emergencies are supposed to be limited, not forever bearing.
  We have to come up with a different solution. This is not working. 
This doesn't work at all. For us particularly, we as Congress, haven't 
done our job.
  Every 6 months--if you hear what I am saying here, every 6 months we

[[Page H3664]]

should be bringing these up, whether their application is great or 
fettered or very, very faint, and we should discuss this: What about 
Libya? What about Yemen? What about these other ones, Iraq and others? 
By the way, this is regular order. Anything we are detailing here is 
regular order.
  This is almost comical to me. I hate to say it in that light, but 
when Senator Church put this detail together, he spent a lot of time 
trying to address this publicly. He tried to get as many people 
involved in it as he could, and yet, we turn around and do this to him.
  We have got to come up with something better, something different, 
something short-lived, something that actually can keep our eye on the 
prize.
  I don't know whether it is something that we put together in a 
clearinghouse for known terrorists and whether we utilize that in some 
way, shape, or form so that we can make sure that we are keeping up to 
date on all of that, but something has to happen, and it is not in the 
national emergencies.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of this 
joint resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.


                             General Leave

  Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
to include extraneous materials on the measure under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time to close.
  Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume for 
the purpose of closing.
  Mr. Speaker, I will be brief because, unfortunately, when we are in 
this august body, the world is looking at us. As I was scratching my 
head on the first resolution, I continue to do that.
  Judgments I use in making determinations is: Is this good for 
America?
  The question is, does this resolution promote America's national 
security? The answer to that is no.
  Does this resolution support America's economic interests? The answer 
to that is no.
  Would this resolution undermine America's standing in Libya? The 
answer to that is absolutely yes.
  Would this resolution undermine our standing in the region? The 
answer to that would be absolutely yes.
  Mr. Speaker, there is no need for me to continue to stand to debate 
this. I strongly oppose, and I believe overwhelmingly the Members of 
this Congress oppose this resolution, and we should vote it down.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Unfortunately, the alarm bells being raised by some proponents of 
these measures are demonstrably wrong and misleading.
  The national emergencies at issue today rely on IEEPA, the 
International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which does not provide the 
President with any domestic statutory powers like testing chemical 
weapons or seizing radio stations unless the President issues another 
executive order specifically invoking those emergency powers.
  If the President were to do so, which no President has ever done, the 
National Emergencies Act gives Congress the expedited privileged right 
to disapprove that power, which we undoubtedly would do.
  Furthermore, there is no power to draft Americans into Active Duty. 
That was terminated in 1978. In contrast, let me remind this body, the 
legal certainty we are facing is that terminating these emergencies 
would immediately hand many millions of dollars to terrorists and war 
criminals and would eliminate an important source of compensation to 
American victims of terrorism.
  Now, I remind my colleagues, with respect to Muammar Qadhafi's 
continued inclusion, if Muammar Qadhafi was delisted, all of his assets 
would be bequeathed to his children. While he has been dead for over a 
decade, as everyone knows, you can't take your money with you when you 
go, so we are preventing that money from going toward funding 
terrorism.

                              {time}  1445

  While I appreciate this dialogue, it is abundantly clear that the 
consequences of passing this resolution as well as the others are 
extensive. Amidst Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the Wagner Group's 
continued war crimes across the globe, and the ongoing instability in 
Libya, we must keep this state of emergency and associated sanctions in 
place.
  I again reiterate the point that with regular order, this should be 
going through the Foreign Affairs Committee.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the order of the House of July 13, 2023, the previous 
question is ordered on the joint resolution.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint 
resolution.
  The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 
time, and was read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the joint 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________