[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 4, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S773-S796]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HOUSING FOR THE 21ST CENTURY ACT
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sheehy). The clerk will report the bill by
title.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 6644) to increase the supply of housing in
America, and for other purposes.
Amendment No. 4308
(Purpose: In the nature of a substitute)
Mr. Scott of South Carolina. I call up substitute amendment No. 4308.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. SCOTT] proposes an
amendment numbered 4308 to H.R. 6644.
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask that the reading be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of
Amendments.'')
Amendment No. 4307
Mr. THUNE. I call up amendment No. 4307 from Senator Scott.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:
[[Page S774]]
The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Thune], for Mr. Scott of
South Carolina, proposes an amendment numbered 4307 to
amendment No. 4308.
Mr. THUNE. I ask that the reading be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To require the Comptroller General of the United States to
submit to Congress studies on workforce housing, housing for persons
who are elderly or disabled, proximity of housing to Superfund sites,
and residential heirs property)
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. GAO STUDIES.
(a) Workforce Housing Study.--
(1) Middle-income household defined.--In this subsection,
the term ``middle income household'' means a household with
an income above 80-percent but that does not exceed 120-
percent of the median family income of the area, as
determined by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
with adjustments for smaller and larger families.
(2) Study.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United
States shall conduct a study and submit to Congress a report
that--
(A) identifies obstacles middle-income households face when
looking to secure affordable housing;
(B) identifies geographic areas where housing is the most
unaffordable and unavailable for middle-income households;
(C) includes a list of Federal housing programs, including
Federal tax credits, grants, and loan programs, that are not
available to middle-income households due to their income
status, including Federal housing programs designed to
promote affordability;
(D) recommends income and other parameters to establish a
clear and consistent Federal definition for the term
``workforce housing'' for use when describing the segment of
housing that could be made available to those middle-income
households in Federal housing programs if funding
commensurate with the additional eligibility were to be made
available; and
(E) analyzes how to modify or newly develop new Federal
housing programs and incentives to include ``workforce
housing'' if funding commensurate with the additional
eligibility were to be made available.
(b) Housing for Elderly or Disabled.--Not later than 1 year
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller
General of the United States shall carry out a study and
submit to Congress a report that identifies options to remove
barriers and improve housing for persons who are elderly or
disabled, including any potential impacts of providing
capital advances for--
(1) the program for supportive housing for the elderly
under section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C.
1701q); and
(2) the program for supportive housing for persons with
disabilities under section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez
National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013).
(c) Proximity of Housing to Superfund Sites.--Not later
than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Comptroller General of the United States shall carry out a
study and submit to Congress a report that identifies how
many residential dwelling units, and how many dwelling units
that are a part of public housing (as defined in section 3(b)
of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437a(b))), are located less than 1 mile from a site that is
included on the National Priorities List established pursuant
to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605).
(d) Residential Heirs Property.--Not later than 1 year
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller
General of the United States shall carry out a study and
submit to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Financial Services
of the House of Representatives a report that--
(1) establishes a comprehensive definition of residential
heirs property, or family land inherited without a will or
legal documentation of ownership;
(2) examines the occurrence of and consequences to owners
of residential heirs property, and provides an estimate
regarding the number of current residential heirs properties;
(3) describes the objectives and requirements of the
Uniform Partition of Heirs Property Act as approved by the
National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in
2010;
(4) details the various resources that may be available to
the owners of residential heirs properties, including housing
counseling, legal services, and financial assistance to
resolve residential heirs property title issues from the
Federal Government, nonprofit organizations, and institutions
of higher education; and
(5) makes recommendations with respect to how to reduce the
number of residential heirs properties, including--
(A) by incentivizing States and other jurisdictions which
enact or adopt the Uniform Partition of Heirs Property Act or
similar such reforms;
(B) by awarding grants to States and other jurisdictions to
assist residents of those States and jurisdictions to
establish and document property ownership rights or settle a
decedent's estate;
(C) by awarding grants to entities that--
(i) provide housing counseling, legal assistance, and
financial assistance to homeowners and their heirs relating
to title clearing and home retention efforts of heirs'
property; and
(ii) target services to low- and moderate-income persons or
provide services in neighborhoods that have a high
concentration of low- and moderate-income persons; and
(D) by conducting other activities that assist individuals
to clear title with respect to heirs' property and with
general estate planning.
Mr. THUNE. I ask for the yeas and nays on the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays are ordered.
Amendment No. 4310 to Amendment No. 4307
Mr. THUNE. I have a second-degree amendment at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Thune] proposes an
amendment numbered 4310 to amendment No. 4307.
Mr. THUNE. I ask that the reading be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To improve the bill)
At the end add the following:
``This Act shall take effect 1 day after the date of
enactment.''
Amendment No. 4311
Mr. THUNE. I have an amendment to the text of the underlying bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Thune] proposes an
amendment numbered 4311 to the text proposed to be stricken
by amendment No. 4308.
Mr. THUNE. I ask that the reading be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To improve the bill)
At the end add the following:
``This Act shall take effect 2 days after the date of
enactment.''
Mr. THUNE. I ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays are ordered.
Amendment No. 4312 to Amendment No. 4311
Mr. THUNE. I have a second-degree amendment at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Thune] proposes an
amendment numbered 4312 to amendment No. 4311.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To improve the bill)
Strike ``2 days'' and insert ``3 days''
Motion to Commit with Amendment No. 4313
Mr. THUNE. I move to commit the bill to the Committee on Banking,
Housing, and Urban Affairs with instructions.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Thune] moves to commit
the bill to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs with instructions to report back forthwith with an
amendment numbered 4313.
Mr. THUNE. I ask that the reading be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To improve the bill)
At the end add the following:
``This Act shall take effect 4 days after the date of
enactment.''
Mr. THUNE. I ask for the yeas and nays on the motion to commit with
instructions.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays are ordered.
Amendment No. 4314
Mr. THUNE. I have an amendment to the instructions.
[[Page S775]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Thune] proposes an
amendment numbered 4314 to the instructions of the motion to
commit.
Mr. THUNE. I ask unanimous consent that reading be waived.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To improve the bill)
Strike ``4 days'' and insert ``5 days''
Mr. THUNE. I ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays are ordered.
Amendment No. 4315 to Amendment No. 4314
Mr. THUNE. I have a second-degree amendment at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Thune] proposes an
amendment numbered 4315 to amendment No. 4314.
Mr. THUNE. I ask unanimous consent that the reading be waived.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To improve the bill)
Strike ``5 days'' and insert ``6 days''
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
Honoring Sergeant First Class Noah Tietjens
Mr. RICKETTS. Mr. President, I rise today to honor and remember a
great Nebraskan. Noah Tietjens was killed by the Islamic Republic of
Iran in Operation Epic Fury.
As a young man, he joined the military to protect and serve our
Nation, and he gave his last full measure of devotion after serving
nearly two decades in protecting our country.
I mourn for him with my fellow Nebraskans, and I ask my fellow
Nebraskans and all here to pray for Shelly, his wife; Dylan, his son;
and for the five other Americans who were killed in Operation Epic
Fury. They are truly great Americans who are protecting our Nation.
Moment of Silence
Mr. President, I ask for a moment of silence to remember them.
(Moment of silence.)
Iran
Mr. President, the Islamic Republic of Iran is a terrorist nation.
Nearly 50 years ago, they started this reign of terror by storming our
Embassy and kidnapping our diplomats, and they have been chanting
``Death to America'' ever since. They have been responsible, as the
leading sponsor of state terrorism, for terrorist attacks all around
the world. It has led to the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of
Americans.
When we had American troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, 2,000
were killed by IEDs, and we know that Iran funded these weapons.
We know that they have had plots to assassinate our President and
other officials in our own country--on American soil. We know that they
have funded the Houthis, Hamas, and Hezbollah; that they have bombed
our friends and killed civilians. And when their own people protest
their terrible policies, they kill the protesters--their own people--by
the thousands.
We cannot let a nation that embraces terror in the way Iran does have
a nuclear weapon. This has, again, been the policy of Presidents, as
the administrations have changed--that Iran cannot be allowed to have a
nuclear weapon.
Thus, we come to the reason for Operation Epic Fury.
Iran had been in negotiations with numerous administrations and had
always refused to give up their nuclear ambitions. This administration
has decided that enough is enough. The goal is to make sure Iran cannot
threaten us or their neighbors.
So we are targeting the things that they could use to do that--their
missiles, their missile launchers, their missile stockpiles, their
ability to manufacture those missiles that they are using right now to
attack their neighbors. We are attacking their navy so their navy
cannot threaten the shipping that goes through the Persian Gulf and the
Strait of Hormuz and to make sure they cannot mine it to shut this
down. Ultimately, we will continue to go after their nuclear facilities
that they stubbornly refuse to give up. We will go after them.
We have learned the lessons from North Korea that, once a nation has
nuclear weapons and a missile system, they are not going back. Iran can
already reach allies of ours right now with their ballistic missiles.
We know they want to continue to develop those to reach Europe and
then, ultimately, the United States.
A country that chants ``Death to America'' and has a nuclear weapon
and a missile that can reach us is a danger to our people. This can
never be allowed to happen. That is why we have to destroy their
ability to threaten us and their neighbors, right now, before it gets
out of control. If we wait too long, we may not be able to stop it.
Thank you to our brave women and men in uniform who are carrying out
this operation, who are risking themselves to keep our country safe.
I ask for the prayers of the Nation for all of our members of the
military and to remember their families, who serve alongside them, and
to continue to mourn our dead who have died defending our Nation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ricketts). The Senator from Kentucky.
War Powers Resolution
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, later today, the Senate will consider a
resolution from my good friend and colleague Senator Kaine of Virginia.
The purpose, as our colleague puts it, is to prevent the Nation from
sending our young people to die in war without legitimate
justification.
I do not doubt the sincerity of our colleague's intentions. Like
Kentucky, Virginia is a State with a large military footprint, and the
magnitude of the risks undertaken by the brave people we represent is
simply inescapable. But I would submit to each of our colleagues a few
reminders as the debate unfolds.
First, this weekend's events are not the beginning of a war but an
attempt to end one that has spanned nearly half a century. The Islamic
Republic of Iran was, quite literally, founded on the premise of
existential war against America and against Israel. Over and over
again, it has escalated this war, exported more terror, spilled more
blood, and destabilized an entire region. So, make no mistake about it,
this war belongs to the mullahs in Tehran.
As I have explained so many times, over the years, the powers of the
President for the use of military force--with or without prior
congressional approval--are, actually, well established.
Every single President during my time in the Senate has invoked these
inherent authorities. From President Reagan's strikes on Libya to
President Biden's strikes on the Houthis, to President Trump's use of
force to end Iran's war of terror, it is squarely within his inherent
authorities as Commander in Chief. Therefore, I will oppose the Kaine
resolution and would recommend our colleagues do the same.
Now, with that said, a President's clear authority to use military
force does not absolutely absolve him from a responsibility to place
his national security decisions on the broadest possible political
foundation. In fact, precisely because Presidents hold such expansive
constitutional authority, it is incumbent on them to ensure such use is
judicious, rooted in core national interests, and broadly supported by
the American people.
Literally, for decades following World War II, Presidents of both
parties tended to take this responsibility quite seriously. They
understood that wild swings in foreign policy between administrations
could confuse our allies and embolden our adversaries. So, throughout
the Cold War, they spent considerable time and political capital
explaining to the American people the stakes, objectives, and
strategies they intended to pursue in service of our national security.
When it came to Iran policy, President Obama did not take this
responsibility to heart, and it is little surprise that his unilateral
deal did not survive for long after his Presidency. Likewise,
[[Page S776]]
despite my urging, President Biden failed to speak clearly to the
American people about our national interest in helping Ukraine resist
aggression.
President Trump has made a bold and tough decision--one that could
transform the region for the better, literally, for generations to
come. But there are risks involved, and I hope his administration will
work to explain the connection between the Commander in Chief's worthy
objectives and the military and diplomatic means to achieve them.
Connecting ends and means is the essence of strategy, and it is
important for the administration to explain to the American people how
they intend to do so.
In turn, our colleagues in the minority have a responsibility to
actually listen and to not reflexively oppose foreign policy decisions
of Presidents they don't like. After all, we don't have to look far
into the past to find Senate Democrats voicing support for keeping the
military option on the table in America's dealings with Iran or
supporting President Biden's unilateral military force against Iran's
proxies in the absence of explicit congressional authorization. More
immediately, I hope our colleagues will consider the consequences of
terminating ongoing operations before they have even succeeded.
What would the Chinese or the Russians conclude if America abruptly
lost its stomach for decisive action?
What cold comfort would our allies take from an increasing erratic
and partisan application of U.S. foreign policy commitments?
The consequences of successfully ending Iran's decades-long war
against us and our allies and partners could reach far beyond the
Middle East. This is evident in the way Russian and Chinese officials
quickly--very quickly--condemned U.S. and Israeli operations and in
their unwillingness or inability to come to Tehran's aid in a
meaningful way.
Two observations at this point:
First, one of the reasons U.S. operations have enjoyed such freedom
of maneuver in the Western Hemisphere and the Middle East is that
Russia is bogged down in its war in Ukraine--a war whose battlefield
innovations are already shaping operations over in the Gulf. If Russia
were more unencumbered, it could have provided more materiel assistance
to its partners in Venezuela and Iran.
The price of peace in Ukraine matters, and we should be careful not
to compel an outcome that allows Russia to reassert itself in regions
of critical importance to the United States. At the same time, there is
tremendous value globally to destroying Iran's ability to produce the
drones that rain down death in Europe and the Middle East alike. There
is likewise value in disrupting its illicit oil trade with the PRC.
And, finally, a word about munitions and military readiness and the
defense industrial capacity. Regardless of disagreements on the pending
question, every one of us should want the United States to have the
best possible military. Every one of us should want our Armed Forces to
be prepared for even more challenging threats.
Today, the U.S. military is not prepared to confront aligned
adversaries and deter or defeat aggression simultaneously on multiple
fronts. The reasons are numerous, and there is plenty of blame to go
around.
Administrations have failed to submit budget requests that meet the
basic requirements of the military. Congress has failed to pass timely,
full-year appropriations. Industry has failed to anticipate inevitable
demand. And, now, America faces Russia's war against Ukraine and
China's determined military modernization with shallower magazines of
critical munitions.
But there is good news. With more funding, there is spare production
capacity to be tapped for this year, fiscal year 2026. We can build
more munitions, produce more spare parts for airplanes, repair ships,
invest in dilapidated military infrastructure, and deepen our
cooperation and coproduction with our allies.
We shouldn't wait another year to seize these opportunities. The way
to realize the well-resourced military our Nation requires for future
conflicts is to build it today, right now.
My colleagues have heard me invoke the wartime words of the late ADM
Harold Stark, but his warning bears repeating:
Dollars cannot buy yesterday.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
United States and Canadian Hockey
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I want to say a brief word about two
subjects today:
First, hockey, a wonderful sport. It requires endurance, stamina,
hand-eye coordination, balance. I have never played hockey. My son did
in high school, and he was good. He was very good. Because he was
interested in hockey, I learned a lot about it. I went to his games,
his practices. I really learned to admire the sport and the talented
people who play hockey. As an aside, I will tell you one lesson I
learned about hockey through my son: You can't wash hockey gear. And as
you probably know, Mr. President, you carry the hockey gear around--
hockey players do--in these big duffel bags, huge, which, of course,
they zip up, and my son did that.
When he would come in from practice or a game--and I would help him
with his bag full of gear that you can't wash. Be very, very careful
when you unzip that bag because the smell will knock you cold.
Why do I mention hockey? Well, we just had a great hockey game.
United States v. Canada. The United States won--men's hockey. The
United States won, and I am very, very proud of our boys. It was a
close, close game, 2 to 1 in overtime. And, of course, we celebrated
that victory and congratulated our U.S. team at the State of the Union
Address.
But I want to mention Canada. I think it is important to know that
Canada has got a great team too. That was just a really good game, and
it could have gone either way. And I so admire the people of Canada.
Things get rocky a little bit between us--between America and Canada--
but deep down Americans love the people of Canada. They are smart and
they are hard-working and they are industrious and they are our
neighbors and, you know, we just appreciate them so much. And I just
wanted to say to the members of the Canadian hockey team: Well played.
Well, well played.
I am proud of America and our boys for winning, but I am proud of the
young men who played for Canada as well, and I wanted to say that.
Netflix
The second thing I want to talk about, briefly, is Netflix--Netflix
and lawfare. Permit me to explain.
I love Netflix. I don't get to watch a lot of television, but
sometimes when I come in, in the evening and I want to relax, I will
watch one of the shows on Netflix.
And, you know, they have shows like--I wrote a few down--``Godless,''
``Adolescence,'' ``Ripley,'' ``The Queen's Gambit''--just wonderful,
wonderful acting. I really admire Netflix. It is a great American
company. The ingenuity, the creativity that its founders had to have to
come up with this concept--you know, video demand through streaming.
Netflix is so successful today. They have 325 million subscribers.
Their movies go out and their limited series go out all across the
world; 56 languages, I think. Netflix has 16,000 employees. They
generate about $45 billion a year in cashflow. It is just a great
American company, and I am proud of them.
That is why I was so surprised to hear recently some of the things
said by one of the Netflix board of directors. I don't know how many
directors Netflix has. I think it is anywhere from 10, 11, 12, 13--
really bright people. You go through and read their resumes, you can't
help but be impressed. They are well compensated. Now, just to be a
board member, they pay you $300,000 a year.
But I was shocked to hear what one of their board members said. And I
don't know if this board member was speaking for Netflix because she is
so prominent. She is well-known, and it is well-known that she is on
the board of Netflix. I think she was on the board of Netflix and then
went into government.
I am talking, of course, about Ms. Susan Rice, who worked for
President Obama and President Biden; a Stanford
[[Page S777]]
graduate; a Rhodes Scholar; has a DPhil from Oxford. Ms. Rice--I guess
I should say Dr. Rice--is absolutely brilliant.
But anyway, one of her paying gigs right now--I suspect she will go
back into government. One of her paying gigs right now is she is a very
prominent independent director for Netflix. And it is very hard to--I
mean, when she is so prominent, and you have this extraordinary
American company, it is--they are kind of joined at the hip. That is
why I was so surprised. I want to read you what Ms. Rice said. I am
going to quote. These are her words, not mine. This is what Ms. Rice
said:
When it comes to the elites, you know, the corporate
interests, the law firms, the universities, the media . . .
it is not going to end well for them. For those that decided
that . . . [they] would act in their perceived very narrow
self-interest, which I would underscore is very short-term
self-interest, and . . . take a knee to Trump--
Not President Trump, not Mr. Trump--
take a knee to Trump--
As an aside, that surprised me because when I talk about President
Obama or President Biden or President Trump, I am always very careful
to call them President. Democrat or Republican, it is a matter of
respect. But she said--I am going to repeat this sentence:
For those that decided . . . [they] would act in their
perceived very narrow self-interest--
Ms. Rice said--
which I would underscore is very short-term self-interest,
and . . . take a knee to Trump . . . they are going to be
caught with more than their pants down, they're going to be
held accountable by those who come in opposition to Trump and
win at the ballot box.
[I]f these corporations--
I don't know if she is talking about Netflix or not. I know she is on
the board of Netflix.
[I]f these corporations think that the Democrats--
Ms. Rice, as you probably know, is a prominent Democrat.
[I]f these corporations think that the Democrats, when they
come back in power, are going to play by the old rules and
say, ``Oh, never mind, we'll forgive you for all the people
you fired, all the policies and principles you've violated,
all . . . the laws you've skirted,'' I think they've got
another thing coming.''
Because just like when Trump fought--
Once again, ``Trump,'' not President Trump--
Because just like when Trump thought, ``Ok, I will
redistrict, and the Democrats won't have the guts to play
hardball, they are going to be surprised.''
Democrats have had a bellyful, and we are not going to play
by the old set of rules when these guys are playing by a
different set of rules.
Ms. Rice talked about being surprised. I am surprised. I am shocked.
What came to mind, initially, when I read these words, is: You can only
be young once, but you can always be immature. You can only be young
once, but you can always be immature.
What Ms. Rice is talking about is payback. What Ms. Rice seems to be
saying is two wrongs don't make it right, but they do make it even.
What Ms. Rice seems to be saying--and I don't know whether she is
speaking on behalf of Netflix or not--but what Ms. Rice seems to be
saying is that it is OK in America today to use the law to prosecute
and harass your political enemies. I find that astounding coming from a
person of her stature.
That is the sort of thing that doesn't happen in America. That is the
sort of thing that is only supposed to happen in countries whose
Powerball jackpot is 287 chickens and a goat, not America. We believe
in the rule of law. We believe in equal protection. We believe nobody
is above the law but nobody is beneath it. I can't think of a more
irresponsible statement for somebody to make.
I remember when former President Biden started this lawfare business.
Former President Biden, directly or indirectly, instructed Judge
Merrick Garland, who was then-Attorney General, to prosecute a former
President of the United States--a former President of the United States
who had run against President Biden, Attorney General Garland's boss,
and a former President of the United States who, at the time he was
prosecuted by the Justice Department, was a current opponent against
President Biden. And I remember thinking at the time: They have
unleashed spirits they cannot control. That is not what America is all
about.
And I know some are going to say: Well, President Trump is doing the
same thing. If that is true, I don't like that either. In fact, when
many of President Trump's nominees for the Justice Department came and
appeared before us for confirmation in Judiciary, on which I sit, I
talked to them about this. I said ``Two wrongs don't make a right, but
they do make it even'' is wrong. It was wrong then, when President
Biden did it, it is wrong now if people are doing it, and it is going
to be wrong if Ms. Rice gets back into government. And it is wrong for
her to advocate this, especially if she is doing it on behalf of
Netflix, a great American company. Gosh. You can only be young once,
but--man, oh, man--you can always be immature.
I suggest the absence of a quorum unless the Parliamentarian wants me
to yield to somebody. She is pointing to Senator McCormick, so I am
going to yield to my good friend, the distinguished, handsome Senator
from Pennsylvania.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
H.R. 6644
Mr. McCORMICK. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from
Louisiana.
Mr. President, I rise today in support of the ROAD to Housing Act. I
grew up in northeast Pennsylvania, in a town called Bloomsburg,
believing in a simple deal: You work hard, you play by the rules, and
you can build a life in your own home. But that promise--the American
dream--has become increasingly out of reach to families across our
great Commonwealth. There are too few homes to buy and too many aging
homes that families can't afford to maintain.
The numbers tell a clear and disturbing story. Pennsylvania is short
about 100,000 homes today. That is the same number of seats as we see
here in Penn State's Beaver Stadium. Median home prices have hit an
alltime high of $325,000, rent has surged, and more than half our
housing stock in Pennsylvania is over 50 years old, which means greater
repair costs for homeowners already struggling with tight, tight
budgets.
The absence of good, new, affordable housing has locked out young
families. When I was a teenager, the median age of a first-time
homeowner was 29--29 years old. Today, it is 40--40 years old. That is
an entire decade of home ownership and wealth building that has been
lost by a generation.
Now, American families didn't create this problem; Washington did.
Major Federal housing programs had been funded for decades without
serious reform. Some hadn't been updated since the 1960s. The Biden
administration had 4 years to address this crisis, and instead, we got
more bureaucracies, more mandates, and reckless spending that drove
this problem off the cliff.
From the row houses of Philadelphia to the small towns of the
Monongahela Valley, home prices across Pennsylvania have risen more
than 75 percent--75 percent--since 2020. Nationally, the average
monthly mortgage payment is over $1,000 higher than when President
Biden took office.
Just last year, I visited Bedford Dwellings in Pittsburgh's historic
Hill District with HUD Secretary Turner, and we spoke with great
Pennsylvanians who feel that the American dream is increasingly out of
reach. I hear this feedback everywhere I travel across the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania. This is a big problem, it is an unacceptable problem,
and it is time for a new direction.
President Trump's leadership is lowering housing costs for American
families. He cut redtape in permitting and construction, and he
directed key Agencies to keep Wall Street out of the starter home
market. And he delivered the most significant Federal investment in
affordable housing in decades via the Working Families Tax Cut Act. But
today--today--the Senate has an opportunity to build on this progress,
with serious bipartisan support, by passing the ROAD to Housing Act.
This important bill advances three goals: First, build more. The act
cuts the redtape, lowers costs, and speeds up zoning and permitting.
Second, fix what we have. Grants and forgivable loans are provided to
low-income homeowners for repairs, for helping to
[[Page S778]]
preserve home values, and to help stabilize neighborhoods. Third,
empower communities, not the bureaucrats. Local leaders are empowered
to make decisions that fit their towns. The Federal Government should
be a partner, not a gatekeeper.
Guided by these three principles, the ROAD to Housing Act represents
the most consequential Federal action on housing in a generation. Let
me repeat that: the most consequential Federal action on housing in a
generation. Passing through the Banking Committee with a unanimous 24-
to-0 vote--Republicans and Democrats alike--is also proof that the
Senate can address important issues in a bipartisan way.
I am particularly proud of the amendments my friend and colleague
Senator Fetterman and I champion together. They protect Pennsylvania
workers, Pennsylvania veterans, and Pennsylvania homeowners. For
example, I was the lead or colead on six provisions that will help
ensure Pennsylvanians, including our 800,000 veterans, can afford good
homes without the risk of falling through the cracks.
The bill in my provisions also empower Pennsylvania's community
lenders. There is a scene in the iconic movie ``It's a Wonderful Life''
where George Bailey, played by Jimmy Stewart--Jimmy Stewart, by the
way, was a native of my dad's hometown Indiana, PA. In that movie, he
fights to save the Bailey Building & Loan. This was a community lender
in the fictional town of Bedford Falls that knew every borrower by name
and made the mortgages that helped ordinary people own homes. That
model once helped build a wonderful life for generations of Americans,
but we have regulated so heavily that community lenders who want to
serve their neighbors can't make the math work.
My friends, home ownership for most young families should not exist
only in the movies. It should exist in Bloomsburg and Bedford and
Braddock and in every Pennsylvania community where a local lender knows
the borrower and wants to say yes. This bill--this bill--makes
important steps in that direction.
And one more thing: The ROAD to Housing Act builds on President
Trump's efforts and takes on Wall Street landlords competing directly
with first-time home buyers for single-family homes. The housing market
should work for Main Street, not for Wall Street.
So for all of these reasons, I am proud to stand in support of the
ROAD to Housing Act. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to
vote yes. Vote yes and make the American dream of home ownership
possible again for the next generation of Pennsylvanians.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
Iran
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. President, ``We now have a government that
cannot manage even a simple crisis at home while, at the same time,
stumbling into continuing catalogue of catastrophic events abroad.''
That is a direct quote from President Trump a year ago, spoken about
the Biden administration, which President Trump spoke in his inaugural
address just over a year ago.
Fast-forward 1 year, and now, it is this administration dragging the
United States into an illegal war with Iran, one that has already taken
American lives and spread chaos and destruction to an entire region.
Iran's authoritarian regime is brutal, corrupt, oppressive, but the
President's approach leaves us facing profound, unanswered questions
about new dangers that may be unleashed.
I don't think there can be a clearer question raised about this
administration than the President's own words said a year ago. We have
a government that can't manage a simple crisis at home, and at the same
time, we have one that is actively seeking catastrophic conflicts
abroad. Every strike, every military escalation, every headline is a
distraction. It pulls our attention overseas from the urgent economic
struggles that Americans face at home. It distracts from the hard, less
glamorous work it takes to make life more affordable for the American
people. Iran is only the latest in a long line of distractions.
Right now, the United States and Israel are hitting targets all
across Iran. The Trump administration entered this war with no plan of
what comes next. And, now, the killing of Iran's Supreme Leader has
left that country facing a dangerous, uncertain future.
The conflict is spreading. Iran is retaliating by launching missiles
at U.S. bases and partner countries across the Middle East. The entire
region has now been dragged into this war, and six American soldiers
are already dead. As we speak, more troops--our courageous men and
women--are being deployed into this volatile region, all to fight a war
of choice that is illegal. It is a war that the American people don't
want.
The administration can't agree on a joint goal, a strategy, or even
an endgame. They don't seem to have one. They didn't anticipate how to
evacuate hundreds of thousands of Americans living in or visiting in
the Middle East who are now being told to flee a war zone but can't
because the airspace is closed.
The United Kingdom has been evacuating its citizens throughout the
region, but our government, which has been planning this attack for
months, doesn't seem to have plans for Americans.
These are worse than mistakes; they are failures that are already
costing American lives and throwing the region into chaos. All the
chaos serves a purpose and distracts from the President's failures at
home; the rising prices, the violence of ICE against American citizens,
and the unreleased Epstein files.
While this House--this White House--wages war abroad, working
Americans are barely treading water at home. Over the last year, the
President's disastrous illegal tariffs have crushed small businesses in
Colorado and across the country. They have raised costs for all
Americans. Tariffs clearly are a tax on Americans.
Just this week, gas prices reached an 8-month high in the response to
the war in Iran. Americans are already paying for this war at the gas
pump. Rent and home prices continue to rise, pushing the average
American's first home purchase to age 40--an alltime record.
Tens of millions of Americans are paying double for their healthcare
because the President and MAGA Republicans passed legislation that will
lead 15 million people to lose their coverage altogether.
In 85 of the country's largest metro areas, childcare for two kids
costs more than rent. On top of all that, U.S. job growth is at its
weakest since COVID, and wages aren't keeping up with inflation.
According to Moody's, the top 10 percent of U.S. households now
account for nearly half of all spending. That means, on paper, the
economy may look relatively good but only for half of Americans--half
of Americans at the top.
While working families struggle to get by, the President has given an
extra boost to the powerful and well-connected. The Trump family
themselves have made $4 billion off the Presidency, and his
administration helped pass $4 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthiest
Americans and for the largest corporations. They forced taxpayers to
give up healthcare in order to pay for this tax cut.
Meanwhile, our communities feel out of control. We have witnessed ICE
arrest children, separate families, kill Americans, all with zero
accountability. We have seen the President and his Department of
Justice delay and deny the release of the Epstein files--the full
Epstein files. And the selective files we do have, the name ``Trump''
shows up more than 85,000 times.
Americans want safety. They want justice. They want to be able to pay
their bills. Instead, what they are getting are coverups, corruption,
and chaos. Here is the thing: Americans know that something is wrong.
Every paycheck feels a little small. Every trip to the grocery store
and the doctor, every bill for rent, energy, or childcare is never
quite enough.
It is a terrible feeling. Americans work hard every day and still
feel like they are getting nowhere. The last thing that they need--the
last thing that we need--is another war.
Americans know how this story ends because we have been here before.
We remember Iraq. The more the President fuels this war machine, the
more
[[Page S779]]
American families are getting closer to running on empty. It is time to
cut short this illegal war and demand that the administration deliver
for Americans and focus on our homes, for every family, for every
soldier, for every paycheck, for every taxpayer dollar.
A year ago, the President warned about a government ``stumbling into
a continuing catalog of catastrophic events abroad,'' but that is what
we have done. We don't need this war. We need to focus on doing better
at home.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sheehy). The Senator from Tennessee.
Working Families Tax Cut Act
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, one of the things I noticed about
today is that it is March 4. That means it was exactly 8 months ago
that President Trump signed into law the Working Families Tax Cut Act.
Now, we knew that this was a massive win for the American people, and
what we are seeing now is that is beginning to play out. The American
people are realizing what a big win passing this Working Families Tax
Cut Act--the Big Beautiful Bill--was.
One of the things that have come up recently is the $150 billion
investment it made in our Nation's defense, and certainly we are seeing
that in action. It has been vital as our men and women of the military
are working day and night to defend our Nation from these attacks from
the largest state sponsor of terrorism on the face of the Earth, and
that is Iran.
It also provided $170 billion for border security, including funding
to complete building the wall on our southern border, building new
detention facilities for those that have illegally entered the country
and are awaiting deportation, and, to make all of this happen, of
course, hiring and training more agents.
I think it is important to note that since this bill was signed into
law, not a single illegal alien has been admitted into our country.
Think about that. For years, millions--millions--of people were coming
into the country, and Heaven knows how many known and unknown ``got-
aways'' were getting into this country. But now, not one. And this has
been especially crucial to maintain our border enforcement as our
colleagues across the aisle, the Democrats, continue their push for a
partial shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security.
When I talk with Tennesseans, the part of the law that they are most
excited about is tax cuts, leaving more money in their pockets and
sending less money to the Federal Government.
Now, true to its name, the Working Families Tax Cut Act delivered the
largest tax relief for Americans in history, and it prevented a $4
trillion tax hike. Of course, that would have been the largest tax hike
ever.
So while these provisions went into effect last year, most people are
just now beginning to see how this is going to affect them because we
are at the point where everybody is trying to get their information
together and fill out their IRS filing for the year.
In this law, I was so pleased that my legislation to remove income
tax from Social Security for our Nation's seniors was included. Every
senior that is 65 years of age and older--every single one--gets a
$6,000 bonus deduction. If it is a couple, married filing jointly,
their bonus deduction is $12,000. What we know is that this eliminates
the income tax for 88 percent of our Social Security recipients.
I think this is a matter of fairness. American workers spend a
lifetime paying into Social Security. The Federal Government has that
first bite at your paycheck. They take that money out. So why should
seniors have to pay tax on that Social Security? It makes absolutely no
sense to be taxing taxes. And that is what this provision has done for
years. So by being able to remove this, we know that most seniors are
going to see an extra refund of somewhere between $670 and $1,300. So
for Americans on fixed incomes, these savings are going to help to pay
for medicine, food, gas, groceries, and other expenses they may have.
For millions of workers, we have also lowered the taxes on tips and
overtime. Americans who go the extra mile deserve to benefit from their
hard work, and this provision of no tax on tips or overtime ensures
that is going to happen. With the new tips deduction, single filers
will see an average savings of $1,370, and some are going to see
savings of as much as $5,500. With the new overtime deduction, the
average is estimated at $1,440.
So this is delivering historic tax relief and benefits for families.
Earlier this year, I had the honor of joining President Trump and
Treasury Secretary Bessent for the official summit for the Trump
accounts. These are new tax-advantaged accounts that were established
in our legislation, and they are going to jump-start the American dream
for millions of children across this country.
With the accounts, Americans that are born between 2025 and 2028 are
going to be eligible for a $1,000 contribution into their account from
the Treasury Department.
Parents and grandparents and uncles and aunts who are always
struggling with what to get for birthday, Christmas, or special events
can contribute up to $5,000 a year into this account until that child
turns 18.
We know these accounts are going to grow to tens of thousands,
hundreds of thousands of dollars by the time that child grows to be an
adult. So I think it is so important for those of us that have
grandchildren, for those of us that have children--think about what
this could mean for those children and grandchildren to be able to have
a debt-free college education or maybe a downpayment on a home or, for
a child that is truly an entrepreneur, the ability to start a business.
We have been so excited about these, and the American people are
excited about them too. Already 2 million families have applied for
these accounts. To any of the Tennessee families who are hearing these
remarks, I would encourage them to sign up for this. It is IRS form
4547.
Be sure you sign your child up for one of these accounts.
Now, it is impossible to list all the savings that are in the Working
Families Tax Cut Act, and there are a few more that are so specific for
families. The enhanced child tax credit was made permanent. That is
going to benefit 40 million families that are now getting ready to file
their Federal income tax.
We also have a new deduction for interest paid on made-in-America new
vehicles. You will be able to deduct the interest on that car payment.
That is going to yield thousands in potential savings for new car
owners.
It permanently extends the estate and lifetime gift tax exemption.
This is vitally important for people that own family farms, that have
generational small businesses. What we have done for these family farms
and small businesses is move that estate or death tax exemption up to
$15 million per individual.
So for a couple that owns a family farm and they want to pass that
on, that would be up to a $30 million exemption.
It also provides a significant increase to the basic standard
deduction and permanently extends the first Trump administration tax
cuts for businesses, bonus depreciation, interest expensing, and
research and development. These are so important because your mom-and-
pop shops that are on Main Street, your small business factories that
are in every town across this country--certainly, we have many of them
in Tennessee.
Families want to consider these businesses, but so often they have
had to sell the business or sell the farm to pay taxes. So often, they
end up losing money because interest expensing or bonus depreciation
was not permanent or was not there at all.
We are looking, this year, at families seeing an average of $2,600 as
a savings on their taxes, and, after they reset their deductions,
seeing a take-home pay increase of about $10,000 for the year.
Our working families tax cuts are strengthening the buying power of
our families. It is strengthening the growth opportunities for our
businesses and our communities in Tennessee and across the country.
And I think it is important to note that I have laid out all of these
things that the American people benefit from. But I would remind the
Chamber: Not one single Democrat voted for any of this--not one.
So I think that is what our colleagues across the aisle will see. As
our senior citizens realize they have got a
[[Page S780]]
$6,000 bonus deduction, they are going to ask them: Why did you vote
against this?
They are going to ask them: Why did you vote against no tax on tips?
Why have you voted for higher taxes? Why did you want a $4 trillion tax
hike?
Those are the questions that the citizens are beginning to ask, and I
know that, as they learn more about what was included in the working
families tax cuts--the Big Beautiful Bill--they are going to have more
questions for our colleagues who were against leaving more money in the
pocket of our citizens.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Ms. ERNST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Iran
Ms. ERNST. Mr. President, as a combat veteran who deployed to the
Middle East, I serve to protect America, not just then but always. And
I stand strongly with our Commander in Chief as he acts on behalf of
the safety and security of Americans.
The Iranian regime has been threatening, targeting, and taking the
lives of our citizens for 47 years. Yet President Obama gave the regime
billions to enrich uranium and obtain weapons used against our own
servicemembers. And President Biden's appeasement strategy continued to
fuel and fund Iran's proxy terrorism.
Enough is enough.
This weekend, President Trump took decisive action so neither Iran
nor its proxies can ever take another one of our citizen's lives. And
the objective is clear: Ensure no American has to live under the threat
of Iran-backed terror again.
Like every American, I have no desire to see a long, drawn-out war,
but this mission is worthy of being completed.
God bless our servicemembers around the world who are bravely and
selflessly carrying out this noble endeavor.
When I served in Iraq and Kuwait in support of Operation Iraqi
Freedom, each day I put on my boots, I donned my Kevlar, and I stood
shoulder to shoulder with my fellow Iowa National Guardsmen, unsure of
what the day ahead would bring. But I knew it was my responsibility, as
a company commander, to help my men and women stay focused when we were
surrounded by chaos. And that remains my prayer for every single one of
our men and women in uniform who are working to end Iran-backed terror.
Our Nation is still grappling with the news that six courageous
heroes, including those from Des Moines' 103rd Sustainment Command and
young Iowan SGT Declan J. Coady of West Des Moines, were killed in
action.
These young men and women gave their lives in support of a noble
mission: protecting their fellow Americans and keeping our homeland
secure. Our Nation owes them an incredible debt of gratitude. It is one
that can never be repaid.
But as their fellow brothers and sisters in uniform carry out the
mission to ensure we never lose another American to Iran-backed terror,
their sacrifice to protect our Nation is not and will not ever be in
vain.
Every American life is precious, and in Iran's decades-long pursuit
of creating chaos around the globe, too many of our servicemembers have
been killed.
In 1979, militants backed by Iran's regime seized 66 Americans from
the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held them hostage for 444 days. Eight
U.S. servicemembers were killed attempting to rescue them.
In 1983, Iran-backed Hezbollah terrorists drove a truck bomb into a
Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 220 marines, 18 Navy sailors, and 3
Army soldiers.
In January 2024, a drone launched by Iran-backed Hezbollah killed
three U.S. soldiers at Tower 22 in Jordan. Those soldiers were
engineers from the 718th Engineer Company out of Georgia. It is one of
my former companies.
And no one can forget October 7, 2023, when Iran-backed Hamas
terrorists massacred more than 1,200 men, women, and children--
including nearly 50 Americans--and they took 12 of our U.S. citizens
hostage.
I was in the region that night and immediately went to Israel, where
I witnessed the effects of Iran's brutality up close.
Make no mistake, folks, when Iran's leaders chant ``Death to
America,'' they mean it.
Our adversaries must understand that a single American loss is one
too many and that they will pay dearly for spilling the blood of those
who wear the uniform.
Already, President Trump's ``peace through strength'' efforts are
working. Iran's Supreme Leader and over 40 senior Iranian regime
leaders have been wiped out. Their weapons systems, their navy, and
their nuclear ambitions are being demolished. And our President, Donald
J. Trump, is bringing the region together, united against their common
enemy, Iran.
Since October 7, I have traveled to the Middle East more than 10
times in pursuit of peace, and I have heard firsthand from leaders
across the Middle East for years about their fears of Iran and its
proxies.
While a more peaceful world was always the goal, as long as the
Iranian regime and its proxies existed, it seemed far from reality.
This week, Iran launched sustained attacks at our partners, thinking
they would fracture our relationships in that region. They thought
wrong. Instead, our partners have been brought together. They know who
the real enemy is, and they have told me they stand with the United
States and they support our actions. These are our Arab friends in the
region. For too long, they have also lived under the threat of the
Iranian regime and are ready for a region where peace and prosperity
can finally take hold.
And we know a safer Middle East means a safer world.
Iowans are no strangers to the consequences of the chaos in the
Middle East, which is why I want to bring an end to it.
In December, two Iowa National Guardsman--Staff Sergeants Nate Howard
and Edgar Brian Torres-Tovar--were killed by terrorists in Syria.
Shortly after, in January, I visited the Iowa troops that were
stationed in the region, including the unit that our staff sergeants
came from, and I had one simple but very important message for them:
Their noble mission matters.
The work our men and women are doing overseas is helping keep the
American homeland safe, but now is our opportunity to bring an end to
the decades of chaos--the sooner the better. While the power to declare
war exclusively rests with Congress, the responsibility to defend our
Nation and our homeland is in the hands of our Commander in Chief.
And don't forget, Congress holds the power of the purse. Yet, at this
very moment, the Department of Homeland Security is shut down by Senate
Democrats who are blocking its funding. This is a dangerous time for a
political stunt. We don't know if there are terrorist sleeper cells
waiting to avenge the death of the Ayatollah, or even lone radicals.
Consider, a gunman who killed two in Austin, TX, on Sunday was wearing
a T-shirt featuring an Iranian flag, and a Virginia mosque less than an
hour's drive away from this very Capitol honored the ``martyrdom'' of
the Ayatollah this week.
While I appreciate the gentleman from Virginia's interest in
exercising Congress' war powers, I would urge all of my Democrat
colleagues to get behind those who are at this moment defending our
Nation.
We have already lost too many lives at the hands of Iran, but as long
as the Iranian regime chants ``Death to America,'' the lives of our
citizens will continue to be threatened.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. President, the military strikes on Iran by the United
States and Israel are a reckless escalation of an illegal war.
Americans do not want another endless war in pursuit of regime change.
Americans want to fix the affordability crisis here at home. Americans
want to fund healthcare, not endless warfare. Americans want to reclaim
the tax breaks for billionaires and millionaires to spend it on
healthcare and education and environmental protections in our country.
This war is not helping America; it
[[Page S781]]
is hurting America. This war is built on lies about nuclear threats,
and those lies are now costing American servicemembers' lives.
Senators got a classified briefing from the administration yesterday,
and it confirmed what we already knew: This is an unnecessary and
illegal war--of choice--by Donald Trump. Iran posed no immediate
threat, and there is no plan to end this catastrophe.
President Trump said yesterday that he started this war because ``he
had a feeling''--Donald Trump ``had a feeling,'' he said, that Iran was
going to attack. There is no evidence--zero--to back this up. He has
presented no evidence to back up his feeling, and that is outrageous.
We should never ever start a war based on a feeling but only on facts.
Donald Trump is risking the world on his whims and on his feelings.
There was a time for diplomacy and for Trump to seek congressional
approval. Instead, this war will be a wrecking ball through the Middle
East and must be stopped.
Any war should have the support of Congress and the American people.
Trump's war has neither. This attack has not been approved by Congress
and holds dangers for all Americans.
If Trump does not stop this war now, Congress must. I look forward to
voting later today to support the bipartisan War Powers Resolution to
stop this illegal war.
Let me be clear: This is a crisis of Trump's own creation. Iran's
nuclear program was under control, thanks to the 2015 nuclear deal
which severely limited Iran's enrichment program and was working to
prevent Iran from producing a nuclear bomb. But Trump tore up that deal
in 2018 and then bombed Iran last June. Trump claimed then that the
attack obliterated Iran's nuclear program. If it did, why is he
attacking now? Was he lying then or is he lying now? He was lying at
some point in this process. Either it was obliterated or it wasn't.
A diplomatic solution remains the best way to permanently and
verifiably prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. The more Trump
bombs Iran, the further we get away from diplomatic deals. We are going
backwards.
Now, with the death of the Ayatollah--a terrible, repressive leader
who no one will miss--there is a power vacuum in the country and more
chaos. There is no guarantee that there will be a change of regime at
all or that whoever replaces the Ayatollah will be any better. In fact,
the replacement could be much worse than the Ayatollah.
Trump clearly sought regime change in Iran, but it is unlikely we
will see it without sending ground troops, which we should not do.
History teaches us that air wars alone do not force regime change. In
Venezuela, we removed the leader but did not change the regime.
The future of Iran should belong to the Iranian people. I stand with
them. Before the attacks, they showed extraordinary courage by
peacefully taking to the streets to demand change.
As much as we all want to help and support the Iranian people, this
is not a moment to impose solutions or shape outcomes from the outside,
but that is what Trump is trying to do.
I left yesterday's classified briefing understanding that Trump had
absolutely no plan for this war or its endgame. It is not clear at all
as to whether or not their goal is to engage in regime change or not.
It is not clear at all when they plan to end this war and what their
goals are that will end the war. And it is very clear that they have no
idea what the successor government will look like in Iran.
They are making this up as they go along in Trump's Oval Office. I
know that because they clearly had no evacuation plan for the scared
Americans who are now struggling to leave the region, many without
answers still as to how they get out of the region. My office is doing
everything we can to help Massachusetts residents who are abroad in the
Middle East trying to get home. We are hearing that the State
Department has no plan to help them. This is a dangerous and reckless
approach to war, and these families do not deserve to be in the
crosshairs.
I am pressuring the State Department to act quickly and decisively to
help bring these families home safely. It is day 5, and it is
unacceptable that they still do not have a clear plan in the Trump
administration as to how to evacuate all of these Americans who are
caught in this Middle Eastern conflict. There was no plan.
The best way to protect people in the region is to end this war and
end it right now. President Trump is completely out of control, and
Americans have already lost their lives because of it. We need to end
this illegal and unnecessary war now, and I will do everything in my
power to make that happen.
No war with Iran.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
Islam
Mr. TUBERVILLE. Mr. President, I have come to the floor several times
over the past few months to sound the alarm about the serious threats
that radical Islam poses to the United States of America. You know,
unfortunately, we are seeing that play out in real time now with what
is happening over in Iran.
You know, as I have discussed many times, radical Islam is not a
religion. It is a death cult, and it is a political ideology that
encourages Muslims to kill all infidels. In simple terms, that means
Americans and Christians. So it shouldn't be a surprise that Iran
launched a 47-year war against the United States almost immediately
after being taken over by radical Islam in February of 1979.
Just 9 months after the Iranian Revolution, which put the radical
Islamists in charge, a group of Iranians stormed the U.S. Embassy in
Tehran and took 66 American hostages. Sometimes, we forget.
A few years later, in 1983, Iran helped orchestrate the deadly Beirut
bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks, which killed 241 American
servicemembers--241. How soon we forget.
In October 2000, Iran's proxies bombed the USS Cole off the coast of
Yemen.
In 2012, Iran conducted a series of cyber attacks on critical
American infrastructure, seeking to take us down digitally.
In 2016, they seized two American ships and held 10 U.S. Navy sailors
hostage for 16 hours.
Since 2023, Iran and its proxies have attacked--have attacked--U.S.
forces 180 times across the world, not to mention they have done all of
this while chanting ``Death to America.'' How nice.
Clearly, these radical Islamic terrorists have one goal in mind: to
wipe out the United States America, to wipe us off the face of the
Earth. To accomplish this goal, they have been working feverishly to
develop a nuclear weapon to gain more strength and more power.
Thanks to Barack Obama entering the Iran nuclear deal in 2015,
sending them pallets of cash, they were almost successful. This so-
called deal basically allowed Iran to build a nuclear stockpile, to
which the United States for years turned a blind eye.
The deal remained in place until 2018, when President Trump withdrew
and imposed maximum-pressure sanctions on Iran. You know, the pressure
worked, as Iran's economy was plunged into a deep recession during
President Trump's 4 years in office. But luckily for them, Joe Biden
got into the White House in 2021, and what did he do? He immediately
reentered Obama's broken nuclear deal with Iran, empowering Iran to
once again build a nuclear arsenal.
They were well on their way to achieving that goal of nuclear power,
but Iran's luck ran out when President Trump got back into office last
year. He pulled the United States out of that nuclear deal, and a few
months later, President Trump gave an order for Operation Midnight
Hammer, which was one of the most impressive missions in U.S. military
history. This flawlessly executed operation destroyed the nuclear
capabilities Iran had been building under Joe Biden.
Unfortunately, Iran's nuclear ambitions didn't end there. Iran's
former leader, the deranged Ayatollah, was doing everything he could to
get their nuclear program back together.
These terrorists cannot be trusted. They want to see every single
freedom-loving American dead--pretty plain and simple--and they would
like the use of a nuclear weapon to do that. That is the reason they
were working for that.
So, as Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said, we didn't start this war,
but we
[[Page S782]]
are damn sure going to finish it. And thank goodness somebody has
stepped up to the plate.
Thanks to President Trump and Secretary Hegseth, on Saturday morning,
U.S. military forces began Operation Epic Fury, a targeted mission to
wipe out Iranian leadership and obliterate the country's offensive
ballistic missile and nuclear weapons capabilities.
Unlike the forever wars in the past 50 years, Operation Epic Fury's
goals, by President of the United States Donald Trump, are clearly laid
out: Destroy the Iranian regime's missiles and their launchers,
annihilate their navy, prevent their terrorist proxies from
destabilizing the world, and ensure Iran can never--never--obtain a
nuclear weapon.
You know, we tried diplomacy, but as the old saying goes, you can't
negotiate with terrorists. They wanted nothing to do with it, but
President Trump and his group tried. That is what these people are--
terrorists--motivated by their radical Islamic beliefs.
If you don't believe me, let's look directly into the Quran. In 2:98
of the Quran, it says: Allah is the enemy of all non-Muslims.
Pretty simple.
In 8:12 of the Quran, it says: Allah will instill fear in the heart
of those who disbelieve, therefore strike them upon the necks.
If you wondered where radical Muslims got the idea of beheading
people, which we saw many times over the years, now you know.
Or take Quran 8:39, which says: Fight non-Muslims until the faith of
Allah is fully established.
Those are not my words. This is all clearly written in the book of
Quran.
Now do you see why I say that radical Islam is not a religion but is
a death cult? They have a plan.
There has been a lot of talk over the past few days about what
``America First'' means, and that is OK. In this country, you have the
right to debate and even to disagree with your government. That is what
this country is all about. But despite the fact that President Trump
has been the leader of the free world for the majority of the last
decade, the mainstream media and leftists still don't seem to
understand it.
So let's spell it out for you: MAGA isn't about isolationism. It is
the big stick that punishes the people who chant ``Death to America.''
``America First'' is about having a military so strong and so
effective that your enemies go into hiding.
In case you haven't noticed, you haven't heard a peep out of Russia
or China since President Trump took out the Iranian terrorists this
past Saturday. In fact, China's oil imports have been crippled since
President Trump took out the Venezuelan dictator and now the radical
Islamic Iranian regime. President Trump now has put our enemies on
notice. Mess around and find out.
To the left screaming ``endless wars,'' no, it isn't. We have been
fighting this war since 1979. Now, it is time to end it. Americans have
been regularly killed by these radical terrorists since 1979. This
operation isn't about nation-building. It is about protecting U.S.
citizens by making sure these terrorists don't get their hands on a
nuclear weapon.
I am proud of our military, which has valiantly executed the mission
so far. This has been the most lethal and successful air campaign in
history. This is a highly complex mission. President Trump says he
expects to potentially go a few more weeks, hopefully minimizing any
more American casualties along the way.
I join every American in mourning the losses of the six American
servicemembers who have been killed so far. These men and women are
patriots who made the ultimate sacrifice for our country and for our
safety. We join their families and friends in mourning their losses,
and we pray for the safe return of all of our brave warriors overseas.
But for those of us who are in the homeland, we must stay vigilant
because the truth is that the threat of radical Islam isn't confined to
the Middle East any longer. Under Joe Biden, thousands of radical
Islamic terrorists illegally entered our country. We have no idea how
many terrorists are here. We have no idea where they are at. It is
scary, but it is true.
Just this past weekend, a 53-year-old naturalized American citizen--
born in Africa--entered a bar in Austin, TX, and senselessly murdered
3--3--innocent Americans and injured 14 others. To no one's surprise,
the terrorist was wearing a sweatshirt that read ``Property of Allah,''
along with a T-shirt underneath with an Iranian flag printed on it. Law
enforcement also found a Quran in the terrorist's vehicle.
If we don't do something about the terrorists who are here, this may
just be the first in a string of attacks carried out by Muslim
terrorist cells in the next few months.
You don't have to look far to see the rising influence that Islam is
having in the United States. More than 5 million Muslims live here
today, and they are influencing our culture and even our laws. We are
blessed that the freedom of worship is a constitutionally guaranteed
right in this country, and it should be. If you want to come here
legally, peacefully practice your religion, and blend into our society
by adopting the treasured American values of life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness, you are welcome to do so. That is what this
country is all about. But if you believe that Sharia law supersedes
American law, our Constitution, and that it is righteous to kill
Americans, you should be deported--pronto.
Sharia law is anti-American and has no place in a free society. Yet,
we are seeing U.S. towns and cities starting to enforce elements of
Sharia law itself. Towns in Minnesota, Michigan, and New Jersey now
allow daily Islamic calls to prayer to be blasted on speakers in public
places. Now, that is not even allowed in Muslim countries--they can't
do that--but we allow that to happen in our country.
The iconic Times Square in New York has been taken over daily by
Islamic calls to prayer--and don't even get me started on this Islamic
mayor in New York City. He took his oath of office with one hand on--
what?--the Quran. I wonder if he agrees with the Quran statements I
listed earlier. I wonder if he believes that. He was recently seen
praying with Muslim police officers, which is fine. Before we realize
it, Mamdani will be enacting Sharia law in America's premier city and
not the U.S. Constitution. It is coming. Additionally, Mamdani recently
visited a New York City mosque which has ties to the Iranian regime. To
make matters worse, the mayor's friend, who runs a mosque, openly prays
for the killing of infidels. And who is that? That is you.
But it isn't just New York. A city in Michigan recently legalized the
barbaric live slaughter of animals for Muslim holidays. This is not a
Third World country, folks. We do not sacrifice animals in the streets
of the United States of America, but I guess our Western values go out
the window when it comes to appeasing the Islamic death cult.
Over the weekend, not far from our Nation's Capital, a mosque held a
memorial service for the late Ayatollah, who was taken out just the
past week by President Trump. They had a memorial service for him. The
mosque's social media post described the Iranian dictator as a martyr
and ``our leader.'' These are people right down the street. Yes, this
is the very same terrorist who was responsible for murdering tens of
thousands of his own people just last month. He was working every
single day to form a worldwide caliphate where Sharia law would be the
constitution and global terrorism--or jihad--would be its foreign
policy, and you have to have Islamists on American soil calling him a
hero. It is absolutely sickening.
For some reason, our colleagues the Democrats in this body are siding
with these people. I don't understand that. I mean, they have nothing
to do with America. We even have some elected officials in this body
who worship Sharia law, and they need to be stopped. If these people
love these Third World countries they are from so much, especially
those people in the House, please feel free to move.
A mosque in Dearborn, MI, also held a vigil for the evil Iranian
dictator, calling him the ``great leader of our time.'' But they didn't
stop there. These idiots also claimed that America was built by devil
worshipers, referred to the Statue of Liberty as ``Lucifer'', and said
they want their children to grow up in a culture of jihad--killing all
Christian Americans.
[[Page S783]]
These people seem to be completely ignorant about the Founders of our
country. So here is a little about the history of America: We weren't
built by devil worshipers. In fact, America was founded by Christians
who believed in one true God. That is why our motto is ``In God We
Trust.'' It is on our currency. Our God is full of forgiveness and
mercy. Jesus, his son, taught us to turn the other cheek and love our
neighbor as ourselves.
Allah, on the other hand, shows no mercy. In fact, he encourages
murder, violence, and the torturing of women. This is why I say that
radical Islam is fundamentally incompatible with American Christian
values. In America, women are allowed to dress, go to school, work, and
marry whomever they like. Iran used to be like this, too, before they
were taken over by radical Islamists in 1979.
This is them post-1979.
Sadly, under the sick leadership of these terrorists, women are
treated like dogs. Did you hear that? Women are treated like dogs. They
are forced to cover every part of their bodies--of their skin--except
for their eyes. They aren't allowed to leave home unless they are with
a male escort. They aren't allowed to get an education or work a job,
and they are forced sometimes to marry as young as 6 years old.
Pedophilia and inbreeding are rampant, and women are lucky if they are
allowed to drive.
Hell, we have a U.S. Congresswoman from one of these Third World
Muslim countries who is married to her brother.
Where are all my Democrat colleagues who claim to be feminists? They
should be outraged by Islam's treatment of women.
We cannot allow this sort of poisonous ideology to fester. Under Joe
Biden, 10 to 20 million people came here illegally. Many of these
people came from radical Islamic countries and brought their sick
ideology with them.
If you live in the United States and practice Sharia law, you should
be deported immediately. We have no choice, folks, if we want to keep
this country. Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out, is
what I say. If you chant ``Death to America,'' we do not want you here.
We are stupid if we just sit on our hands while terrorist cells work
to pull off their next attack and say that this is a one-time deal. It
is not.
Thanks to our Democrat colleagues who just like the way this country
is going and love power, the Department of Homeland Security now is
shut down. That is really smart. This is not the time to be playing
politics. This is an urgent national security crisis. Every single one
of my Senate colleagues put their hand on the Bible in this room and
swore an oath when they joined this body. We swore to defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic.
Well, I have news for you. The enemies are inside the gates. They are
here. It is past time that we reopened the Department of Homeland
Security and deported every single terrorist who is living in this
country--and there are thousands.
If we don't take a stand now, our way of life, our Christian values,
our freedoms, and our national identity are gone. It is going to be
over. There is only room for one law in this country, and that is the
Constitution of the United States of America. For too long, people have
tiptoed around this issue--afraid to hurt someone's feelings or to make
people uncomfortable. But the time for being politically correct is
over.
So the question is: Will we continue to turn a blind eye to the
radical Islamic cult, or will we stand up before more Americans are
killed?
Now is the time to act. If we don't, we will lose our country as we
all know it. We are already starting to see it happen. This isn't a
Republican or a Democrat issue. This is an American issue. I wish more
of my Republican and Democrat colleagues would join me in denouncing
radical Islam before it is too late, but it seems like we are living in
an age in which people are too scared to stand up for what is right.
Weak leaders have allowed the Islamic cult to destroy Europe.
Folks, we are going to be next.
Thank God for President Trump, who actually has the courage to take
out these radical terrorists. Let's get in, complete the mission, and
get out. God bless our President, God bless our troops, and God bless
the United States of America.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
War Powers Resolution
Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, on Saturday morning, the United States
military started conducting airstrikes on Iran, dragging America into
yet another war in the Middle East. Since President Trump's reckless
decision to escalate this conflict, at least six Americans have been
killed in service to their country, and many more have been
injured. And President Trump himself has said:
There will likely be more before it ends.
And then he also said:
Well, that's the way it is.
Well, my heart goes out to their families and loved ones, and I will
be forever grateful for their service and for their sacrifice.
It has been days since this attack, but President Trump has yet--has
yet--to make it clear to Congress--and, more importantly, to the
American people--what exactly our objectives are. What does victory
look like? What he does say seems to change daily, if not more
frequently.
The American people have a right to know the facts and a right to
know the truth.
And our Constitution leaves no room for doubt that Congress--not the
President--has the sole power to declare war. And that check is in
place for a very important reason: Our Founders did not want to place
the immense power over whether or not to go to war in the hands of just
one individual.
They argued, if the President alone could make such a decision
unilaterally, it would be the equivalent of granting the President the
power granted to a King. We all know our history. The United States had
just defeated a King in the Revolutionary War, and our Founders were in
the process of creating a constitutional Republic, not a monarchy.
Talking to my constituents in Michigan, and certainly as evidenced by
numerous polls that have come out recently, President Trump has decided
to start a war that Americans clearly do not want. The American people
instead want us focused on issues that will improve their lives here at
home.
When I hear from Michiganders, they tell me they want lower prices;
they want safer streets; they want more attention to their challenges
here at home. But if Americans are going to send their sons and
daughters into harm's way across the world, they certainly deserve to
know what the President's end goal is and what is the exit strategy.
Now, make no mistake, Iran is a brutal authoritarian regime, and I
have long said that we must ensure that Iran never ever produces a
nuclear weapon, but unless we face an imminent threat, the President
cannot--he cannot--unilaterally drag us into war.
Our country knows too well that war in the Middle East comes at a
very high cost to our servicemembers and to their families, and it is
also an incredibly expensive endeavor for our taxpayers.
In September 2021--20 years after the United States invaded
Afghanistan--Brown University released a comprehensive report that
outlined the staggering cost of the War on Terror. It found that those
military engagements added approximately $8 trillion to our national
debt. We are still grappling with the cost of all of those wars, and
now the President is starting a new one, all without properly
consulting the American people.
But let me be clear: This is not about partisan politics. This is not
about that at all. It is about fundamental constitutional obligations.
In fact, in 2013, Democrats made the Obama administration come to
Congress with a plan for its involvement in Syria. It was Senate
Democrats who forced a vote to authorize the use of military force by a
Democratic President. They did it because it was required by the
Constitution. It was not a party issue. But, unfortunately, my
Republican colleagues seem to be content to simply act as a rubberstamp
for President Trump and not require a vote as required in the U.S.
Constitution.
[[Page S784]]
During my time as a lieutenant commander in the U.S. Navy Reserve, I
served in Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, places where, right
now, our servicemembers are at a heightened risk because of this
operation--and my thoughts and prayers are with these brave
servicemembers and the nearly 40,000 U.S. troops serving within range
of Iranian missiles--and a situation on the ground that is changing
rapidly.
What comes next is critical for U.S. servicemembers, the American
people, and the entire world. That is why, today, the Senate will vote
on a resolution that would assert Congress' power over the President to
declare a war, as outlined in the Constitution, and put forward by our
Founders.
It would not prevent us in any way from defending ourselves against
an attack, but it would ensure that President Trump cannot escalate
this war with Iran without congressional approval--and, more
importantly, the approval of the American people.
The American people deserve answers and our servicemembers deserve
real leadership and that is why I will be voting yes on the resolution
before us here today. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it
because it is past time for this administration to show the American
people a real plan. It is past time for Congress to start acting like a
coequal branch of government.
We need to exercise the checks and balances that our Constitution
expects from us. And that means every Member of this Chamber right
here, right now, needs to go on the record to say whether they want to
be passive, ignore their obligation to the Constitution, and allow the
President to continue this war without a clean, clear plan for the
American people or--or--do they want to require the President to be
fully transparent and accountable to the American people and,
importantly, preserve the integrity of our beloved constitutional
Republic?
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hagerty). The Senator from Nebraska is
recognized.
Honoring Sergeant First Class Noah Tietjens
Mrs. FISCHER. Mr. President, I want to begin with a moment of solemn
gratitude. Yesterday, we received devastating news. U.S. Army SFC Noah
Tietjens of Bellevue, NE, was killed in Kuwait during an unmanned
aircraft system attack while supporting Operation Epic Furry.
He was assigned to the 103rd Sustainment Command out of Des Moines,
IA. Sergeant Tietjens enlisted in the Army Reserve in 2006 as a wheeled
vehicle mechanic. He gave two decades of his life to this country,
deploying to Kuwait in 2009 and again in 2019--always answering the
call, always showing up.
His record of service speaks for itself. Sergeant Tietjens earned the
Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal, the Army
Achievement Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Global War
on Terrorism Expeditionary and Service Medals, the Iraq Campaign Medal
with Campaign Star, the Army Service Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon,
and the Armed Forces Reserve Medal with ``M'' Device.
Each ribbon and each medal marks a chapter of life poured out in
service to something larger than himself. We honor Sergeant Tietjens
today, and we hold his family, his unit, and all who loved him in our
hearts.
In addition to Sergeant Tietjens, five other American heroes did not
come home. All six of these servicemembers gave their last full measure
of devotion in service to this country, and we will never forget them.
To their families--their mothers, their fathers, their spouses, their
children--a grateful nation stands with you and prays for you. May they
rest in eternal peace.
Iran
Mr. President, last week, President Trump made a decisive call to
strike at the world's leading State sponsor of terrorism. The Iranian
regime is responsible for the death of hundreds of Americans and
continued to pose unacceptable threats to this country--to the United
States.
Our brave men and women in uniform carried out Operation Epic Furry
with courage, precision, and unwavering commitment to protecting this
Nation and to protecting the world from one of its greatest threats.
Because of their valor, Iran's ability to project force and project
terror throughout the region has been significantly degraded, and their
nuclear ambitions have been devastated.
But the threat does not end with the strikes this weekend. Iran's
terrorist proxy networks are already embedded in our hemisphere, in
part because of years of open border policies that left this country
dangerously exposed.
Department of Homeland Security
Mr. President, the risk of a terror attack on American soil has gone
up, and our Department of Homeland Security, it is shut down--not
understaffed, not underfunded--it is shut down, for 19 days and
counting.
This Agency was created on September 11, 2001, for one purpose: to
make sure that we never again suffer a catastrophic attack on our
homeland. DHS, they guard our airports; it responds when hurricanes and
wildfires devastate our communities; it defends our power grids, our
water systems, and our financial networks from foreign adversaries who
seek to bring us to our knees. And right now, well, this critical
Agency is crippled.
Sixty-one thousand TSA employees are working without pay, including
42,000 screeners who are standing at security checkpoints in airports
around this country at this very moment. They are screening your bags;
they are checking your boarding passes; they are doing their jobs with
professionalism--all while not knowing how they are going to pay their
rent, how they are going to feed their children, or how they are going
to keep their lights on.
This is not just unfair; this is a disgrace. Two-thirds of CISA, the
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, has been furloughed.
The people whose sole job is to protect our power grids, to protect our
hospitals, our financial networks from Chinese and Iranians and Russian
cyber attacks, they have been sent home.
FEMA's emergency response capacity is totally disrupted.
The Coast Guard, the Coast Guard is unfunded.
The Secret Service is strained.
And every single day that this drags on, the window for a
catastrophic attack on this country--on American soil--it opens up a
little wider. It is these organizations that are bearing the brunt of
this government shutdown.
So I would ask my Democratic colleagues--I will ask them directly--
why? Republicans have put forward a counterproposal. The ball--well, it
is in Senator Schumer's court; and so far, do you know what? We all
know what. He has chosen politics. He has chosen politics over
protecting American people.
Well, let me be clear about where Republicans stand. We will not
accept any agreement that ties the hands of Federal law enforcement. We
will not accept provisions designed to obstruct immigration
enforcement. We have been ready to fully fund the Department of
Homeland Security and get every one of those 61,000 workers back to
doing the jobs that keep this country safe.
Mr. President, let me close with this: Six Americans just gave their
lives to make this world safer. The very least we can do is ensure that
the Agencies defending our homeland here at home have the funding, the
personnel, and the operational capacity to do their job.
To my colleagues across the aisle: End this shutdown, fund our
Department of Homeland Security, and stop holding our national security
hostage.
To the American people: Know that there are those of us who will not
stop fighting until every Agency charged with protecting this homeland
is fully funded, fully staffed, and fully focused on our safety because
that above all else is our most basic responsibility.
God bless our fallen heroes. God bless every servicemember still in
harm's way. God bless the United States of America.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Iran
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I want to associate myself with the
remarks of my colleague from Nebraska Senator Fischer, and I thank the
Presiding Officer for all the leadership you have provided in this
crucial time.
[[Page S785]]
What I would like to do to start with is read a letter that was sent
by Admiral Cooper to all of those participating in Epic Fury. As a
commander, he wanted to let everybody know, in these operations, sort
of what is at stake. If I can, I will read it:
To America's extraordinary sons and daughters deployed
around the Middle East,
By order of the President of the United States, we are
embarking on a mission of profound consequence. The time for
preparation is over. The time for action has arrived.
As we move from deterrence into active combat, I write to
tell you how honored I am to serve with you--the most
exceptional Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Airmen, Guardians and
Coast Guardsmen on this earth.
Some of you are stationed in the Middle East. Many of you
have deployed overseas on short notice. Others have been
extended on deployment for this [crucial] mission. You
represent the strongest, most lethal warfighting force the
world has ever known. You all selflessly serve our . . .
country and make us . . . very PROUD.
Since 1979, the Iranian Regime has killed and wounded
thousands of Americans . . . and continue to threaten
Americans and our friends. Today, by your courage and grit,
you will change the course of . . . history.
My guidance for you is simple:
Be Relentlessly Lethal. In the heat of conflict, remember
who you are. Let your conduct be as professional as your aim
is precise.
Take Care of Your Teammates. The men and women on your
flanks, in front of you and those at your [side] are your
Guardian Angels. Be [there].
Steady Your Resolve. Combat is inherently chaotic. The
hours, days and perhaps weeks ahead will challenge you. There
will be noise and confusion. Fall back on your training. It
is the best in the world.
You are the shield of the free world, and today, you are
its sharpest sword.
As the eyes of the world fix upon [you], stay safe, and
GODSPEED.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this letter be printed in
the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Commander, United States
Central Command,
February 28, 2026.
To America's extraordinary sons and daughters deployed
around the Middle East.
By order of the President of the United States, we are
embarking on a mission of profound consequence. The time for
preparation is over. The time for action has arrived.
As we move from deterrence into active combat, I write to
tell you how honored I am to serve with you--the most
exceptional Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Airman, Guardians and
Coast Guardsmen on this earth.
Some of you are stationed in the Middle East. Many of you
have deployed overseas on short notice. Others have been
extended on deployment for this critical mission. You
represent the strongest, most lethal warfighting force the
world has ever known. You selflessly serve our great country
and make us so very PROUD.
Since 1979, the Iranian Regime has killed and wounded
thousands of Americans, and they continue to threaten
Americans and our friends. Today, by your courage and grit,
you will change the course of human history.
My guidance for you is simple:
Be Relentlessly Lethal. In the heat of conflict, remember
who you are. Let your conduct be as professional as your aim
precise.
Take Care of Your Teammates. The men and women on your
flanks, in front of you and those at your six are your
Guardian Angels. Be theirs.
Steady Your Resolve. Combat is inherently chaotic. The
hours, days and perhaps weeks ahead will challenge you. There
will be noise and confusion. Fall back on your training. It
is the best in the world.
You are the shield of the free world, and today, you are
its sharpest sword.
As the eyes of the world fix upon us, stay safe, and
GODSPEED.
C.B. Cooper II.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, that letter was sent to everybody involved
in Epic Fury. Six people received this letter that have been killed in
action.
This letter is a statement by the commander that what you are doing
is righteous, what you are doing is long overdue, what you are doing
will make your country safer, and the eyes of the world are upon you.
I would like to say this: I have never been more proud of our men and
women in the military than I am now. That is true every day but
particularly now. They have been tested by the sting of battle. Six
have fallen, and God bless them.
The best thing you can do for a military unit when they suffer losses
is to make sure the struggle continues and the sacrifice is not in
vain. That is what they want. They accept the risk of injury and death;
they cannot accept and should not have to accept anything less than
victory.
So a couple of days into this conflict--3 or 4--we have lost six, and
more may follow.
To the families of the fallen: Your loved ones died nobly in the
service of their country.
The enemy that we are facing, Iran, is the largest state sponsor of
terrorism on the planet. They have been killing Americans by the
thousands since 1979.
In 1983, 220 marines, I think 18 sailors, and 3 members of the Army
were killed in Lebanon by Hezbollah, a proxy of the Iranian regime, in
a bombing against the Marine barracks. We withdrew. We never held those
responsible accountable. I love Ronald Reagan. He was a great
President. But that was his biggest mistake.
So we are here to settle the account with the Iranian regime, after
months of trying to negotiate an outcome to avoid conflict that would
prevent Iran from ever having a nuclear weapon, would lessen their
ability to produce missiles that could hit our homeland and terrorize
the region, and to stop their funding of terrorist organizations like
Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis. It was clear during those
negotiations that Iran is wedded to its agenda.
The Ayatollah is a religious Nazi. He is no more likely to give up
his agenda than Hitler was. What does he want? Listen to what he says,
not what I am saying. He says ``Death to America,'' and he means it.
Well, he can't say it anymore because he is dead, but there are others
in Iran who keep saying it. He wants to purify Islam--the regime does.
They are radical religious fanatics that believe there is only one way
to worship God, and that is through the Shia way. The Sunnis in Saudi
Arabia are the worst offenders in their eyes.
So they have a goal to purify the faith of Islam, to create an
international caliphate built around an extreme ideology. That extreme
ideology will allow a 16-year-old girl to be taken off a bus and beaten
to death because she didn't wear her headscarf right. That happened.
There are cameras all over Iran--particularly Tehran--making sure that
as a car goes by, the woman is covered.
These people are fanatics. They throw gay people off buildings. They
will not tolerate any other form of religion. They killed 32,000 people
in the last couple of months who have had it with the Ayatollah.
People are tired of living the way they have to live. They are tired
of having daughters killed for just not wearing their headscarf right.
They are tired of an economy that is broken and a regime that just
wants to destroy the region and is built around a cult of death.
People ask me what happens next. There is zero chance that the
Ayatollah and his henchmen would ever be our friends. There is zero
chance they would give up their religious fanatical ways. We tried for
months, to no avail.
Those that follow, I think, will be better for us. Why do I say that?
If you look at the protesters and consider them no different than the
Ayatollah, then that is an affront to them. They are out in the streets
risking their lives not to have more oppression but to have less. Do
you really think these people who have taken to the streets want to
continue this regime as we know it? Isn't that an offense to them?
But when the regime falls--and it is not if; it is when--the people
of Iran will have a new chance, I hope, to start anew. I don't know
what will happen, but I know it will be their decision. It is not our
decision.
America is not going to go in and run Iran; we are going to try to
take down a terrorist regime that is bent on our destruction. They have
been building missiles--100 a month. The goal is to hit us. They have
been supporting Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis since 1979 to kill
Americans. The IEDs used in Iraq and Afghanistan, coming out of Iran,
maimed and killed thousands of American servicemen, and they were made
by the Iranians--the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and Quds Force. This
regime is a cult of death.
October 7 was designed to stop Israel and Saudi Arabia making peace--
the biggest change in 1,000 years. I worked with President Biden and
his team to build on the Abraham Accords, to have Saudi Arabia
recognize Israel, which would end the Arab-Israeli conflict. We were
close, but the October 7 attack that killed 1,200 innocent Israelis,
slaughtered people, raped women, and
[[Page S786]]
cut children's heads off in front of parents was designed to stop that
process.
Since October 7, Israel has been a state of constant war and
conflict. Hamas is just about done, and President Trump, after trying
through diplomacy, made a decision to call the question on Iran. I talk
to him a lot.
Midnight Hammer was a very successful military operation to degrade
and obliterate the nuclear ambitions of the Iranian regime, and it
worked. But it wasn't very long after that they were right back at
trying to restart it.
I think President Trump came to conclude that there is nothing he can
do; there is no deal to be had with the religious Nazis. And thank God
he concluded that. Can you imagine, a year from now, if we had left
this regime intact--100 missiles a month, more capability?
The money from the JCPOA agreement with Obama and Biden was used to
fuel their war machine, not roads, bridges, and hospitals. The regime
couldn't care less about the people. They have a religious agenda to
dominate the world.
Hitler wanted a master race, believing the Aryan race was superior to
everybody else, and he literally wrote a book about killing all of the
Jews. Nobody believed him. They should have.
This regime, since 1979, has openly embraced a cult of death, and
they have acted on that cult of death.
President Trump, after a sincere effort to bring this conflict to a
peaceful conclusion, concluded that to continue to allow this regime to
move forward would put America at unacceptable risk, and he was right.
So here is where we find ourselves. Operation Epic Fury is off to a
great start. The Ayatollah and his inner circle are dead. They are dead
because they chose not to negotiate. There was no deal to be had with
Hitler in World War II, and there is no deal to be had with the
religious Nazis.
Everybody in Iran is not a religious Nazi--quite the opposite. Most
people in Iran are dying for a better life, and some have literally
died to have a better life.
So this operation is ahead of schedule. Its goal is to make sure this
regime now and in the future cannot produce missiles to hit America,
continue to hold the region hostage, that this regime will no longer be
the largest state sponsor of terrorism, being able to keep Hamas,
Hezbollah, and the Houthis up and running.
So that is the goal, is to take their capability off the table, and
the ultimate capability they want is a nuclear weapon. My goal is to
have people in charge of Iran who don't want a nuclear weapon to blow
the world up, who don't want a bunch of missiles to terrorize America,
who want to live in peace.
When this regime collapses, the Prime Minister of Israel said, a
gateway to peace will be open. I talked with him this morning.
So the big payoff for taking this regime down now before they get
more lethal and about imminent threats--do you really want an imminent
threat before we act? If somebody is threatening your family--to kill
your family, to burn your house down--do you want to wait until they
get to the gas station or the gun store?
Since 1979, they have told us who they are and what they believe. It
is now time to deal with who they are, what they believe, and what they
have done.
So this operation will continue. Every day, Iran grows weaker, and we
grow stronger. The ability to generate missile attacks is going down,
not up. There will be pain before this is over. The likelihood of more
casualties is real. But the reason our men and women are over there is
to protect us over here.
When you take the eye off the ball in the Mideast, they will come
here--9/11. You had 19 people trained in Saudi Arabia, of all places,
that were able to generate 9/11.
When you ignored what happened in Afghanistan, you did so at your
peril. The Taliban gave al-Qaida a safe haven in Afghanistan, and from
there, they trained, and they attacked us on 9/11. I made a promise to
myself that I will do everything I can to never let that happen again.
So if you want to stop radical Islam from blowing you up over here,
you need to fight them over there, and you need to have partners if you
can. There is no better partner on the planet than Israel. They hit
above their weight, they do everything we ask them and then some, and
they ask very little in return.
I do believe the Arab nations in the region that have been viciously
attacked by the Ayatollah's regime--that they are soon going to get in
the fight--at least I hope they will. You will have a coalition of
regional countries, the United States--some support from Europe--
sinking the ship, the largest state sponsor of terrorism. The mother
ship of terrorism is Iran. That ship is sinking, and the captain is
dead.
It is just a matter of time. Israel is committed. President Trump is
committed. This is a righteous cause that makes us safer here at home.
And the big benefit from bringing this regime down, ending this reign
of terror, is that we can get back to the peace table, that we can
renew our effort to try to bring peace to the region in a historic
fashion.
If the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia under Crown Prince MBS would go back
to the table to try to find a peace deal with Israel, it would be the
biggest change in a thousand years. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is the
keeper of the two holy mosques, Mecca and Medina--the most holy of the
holies in Islam. For that country to move forward consistent with
conservative Islamic principles but embracing the world and recognizing
the Jewish State as a legitimate member of the region would be
breathtaking. I think it will happen the day this regime in Iran falls,
that there can never be another October 7 undercutting peace.
So to my Democratic colleagues: This operation is working, is ahead
of schedule, and you should all pray that it is successful.
President Trump for months tried to negotiate, with no results--not
for lack of effort. I have known this for a long time. The Ayatollah is
not a man you can deal with. The Ayatollah is a man you need to make
sure can't kill you and your family. He is Hitler on the religious
side. What he wants for the world is a master religion. Well, his
dreams are going to be denied, and the Iranian people are going to have
a chance to start over. If they want to start over being a friend to
America, we will be their friend. If they want to continue to threaten
us, we will continue to push back.
So why am I here on the floor. There is an effort by my good friend
from Virginia Senator Kaine to terminate the operation.
The War Powers Act was passed years ago by the Congress saying that
after 60 days, any military operation not approved by the Congress must
come to an end. That is just blatantly unconstitutional. That creates
535 Commanders in Chief.
The Constitution designates the President as the Commander in Chief
not for 60 days but for however long it takes to be Commander in Chief.
The Congress can stop military action by cutting off funding. If you
don't like the war in Iran, say: We will not pay for it. We have the
constitutional power of the purse. We can't become the Commander in
Chief after 60 days. You will ruin the country. Can you imagine
Congress being the Commander in Chief? Can you imagine the debate we
would have about what ships to send and what troops to send? It would
be a nightmare. The Founding Fathers understood that. They designated a
single entity in the Constitution--the President--as the Commander in
Chief. They gave power to Congress to declare war.
Does it mean that you can't have military conflict unless Congress
declares war? No. We have declared war five times in the history of the
country: World War II, World War I, the Spanish-American War, the
Mexican-American War, and the War of 1812--five conflicts where
Congress said: We are in a state of war. We have had over 130 conflicts
since the War Powers Act where Congress never authorized anything.
The norm in this country is not to declare war by Congress. But for
the military to be used by the Commander in Chief, sometimes
authorization from Congress is requested, sometimes it is not. More
than not, it is not requested.
The President, as Commander in Chief, has the ability to use our
Armed Forces to protect our Nation, and Congress, if we disagree with
that choice,
[[Page S787]]
has the ability to terminate the action by taking the money away. That
is the check and balance that was created a long time ago. The Founding
Fathers never envisioned that after passage of 60 days, the President
would be replaced by 535 people.
So the War Powers Act, back during the Vietnam era, was an
unconstitutional, in my view, infringement on article II power. I said
that for Obama. I said that for Biden.
When President Biden thought about going into Syria after the
chemical weapons attack, I, along with Senator McCain, said: Do it. You
don't need congressional authorization. You have all the power you
need.
Clinton went into Haiti. I mean, there are just a lot of examples of
Democrats and Republicans using military force. President Bush 41 went
into Panama to take down a drug kingpin.
The norm is not declaration of war; the norm is for the President,
the Commander in Chief, to use military force as they believe
appropriate. The role of the Congress is to check and balance that
decision by cutting off funding if you choose to.
We are going to have a vote at 4 o'clock. The reason I want my
colleagues to reject the War Powers Act is that you will set in motion
a system where 535 people, after 60 days, become the Commander in
Chief, grinding this Nation's ability to defend itself to a halt.
If you want to stop this war, say: We will not pay for it.
I will not agree with you, but at least it would be constitutional.
So I will end where I began. The letter written by Admiral Cooper to
those serving in harm's way reminded them of the history the Iranian
regime has toward us, the American people, our men and women in
uniform.
Since 1979, they have been killing Americans. They have been killing
their own people. They have been slaughtering people in the name of
religion. It is time for that to end. It is time for this regime to
fall. It is time to open the gateway to peace.
To my Democratic colleagues: What you are proposing would create
chaos for every Commander in Chief that follows. You had a chance to
deal with Iran. You gave them money. You were fooled by who these
people are.
President Obama gave them billions of dollars, believing that they
were normal people.
To my Democratic colleagues: The Ayatollah was never a normal person.
Those who are around him are not normal. These people are nuts. These
people are religious fanatics. If you don't get that, you are going to
continue the cult of death.
To those in World War II who thought Hitler was normal: Boy, were you
wrong. How many chances did you have to stop Hitler, and you just blew
it because you thought he really didn't mean to kill all the Jews, that
he could be reasoned with. About 100 million people later, you got it
wrong. We are not going to do that again.
To my Democratic colleagues: You have misjudged Iran from day one,
and in your world, you give them money, hoping they will do better. In
my world, we are going to bring them down. We are going to destroy this
regime to protect America, to free the Iranian people, and to open the
gateway to peace.
To those who argue that we shouldn't do this: What solutions have you
offered? What have you done to bring down this regime, to stop it? You
have done nothing but fuel it, give it money, thinking they would use
it wisely. Boy, were you wrong, were you foolish to give this group a
bunch of money, thinking they wouldn't use it to build a war machine.
This foolish behavior is over. We now have a President--Donald J.
Trump--who understands that the people we are dealing with in Iran--the
regime--are a bunch of religious fanatics; they are religious Nazis. We
are about bringing them down with our Arab partners.
The Arabs in the region have been terrorized by the Iranian regime,
and they are going to join the fight, I hope, soon.
The biggest thing going for us are the Iranian people. We finally
have boots on the ground--them.
Three things have happened, and I will conclude. The Iranian economy
is in shambles because of the sanctions and because President Trump put
a tariff on anybody buying Iranian oil, and their money is drying up.
Midnight Hammer--us, Israel--in the past has depleted and degraded
the Iranian military to the weakest they have been.
Finally, the people have risen up, and you turned your back on them.
You talk about Gaza. You talk about what has happened to the
Palestinians. I understand. Innocent Palestinians being killed--I know
it is hard to watch. I think Israel had to do what they had to do.
Not one word. Have any of you said anything about the protestors?
Have any of you come out and said: I hope you win. I hope you are
successful.
If I were you, I would keep doing--what would you do in Iran? Would
you be out there with them? I hope I would. I don't know if I would be
that brave.
What they are doing today is what we did a long time ago. We rose up
and said: Enough of tyrants.
These people, the protestors, are the best among us all. What have
you done to have their back? What have you done to encourage them?
Nothing. All you want to do is talk about what we can't do. You want to
make sure the oppressor stays in power. If we have to depend on you to
fight evil, it never will be fought.
So the differences between us and our Democratic colleagues could not
be starker. They want to stop this. I want the regime to collapse. I
want to get behind Admiral Cooper and give him and his people what they
need to take this regime down, working with our allies in Israel,
because if we don't do it now, we will regret it.
When it comes to the Ayatollah, you pay now or you pay later. He is
gone, but the regime has not yet collapsed--but it will.
This is the biggest decision I think we can make as a country--to
finally take on this evil in Iran.
Like World War II, you ignored evil to your own peril. You thought
Hitler was normal. He wasn't.
This guy and those around him--the Ayatollah and the cult of death--
they are not normal. They will only be stopped when better people are
risking everything to stop them. That is how it always works. Bad
people are taken down because good people finally have had enough.
So let it be said when they write the history of these times that I
am with the protestors.
You are righteous in your demands. America is here to help you. Help
is not on the way anymore. It has arrived.
Vote no to this War Powers Resolution. It is an affront to our
constitutional democracy.
And to my Democratic friends, you should be ashamed of yourself, not
embracing the righteous nature of the Iranian people's demands.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, the difference between Democrats and
Republicans is that Republicans have learned nothing from decades of
American hubris in the Middle East, believing that U.S. troops, U.S.
planes, U.S. guns, and U.S. bombs could fundamentally change realities
in a far-off land.
Democrats have learned our lesson. We watched as thousands of
American soldiers died in Iraq and in Afghanistan.
We listened to Donald Rumsfeld say that the Iraq war would be over in
5 days, 5 weeks, maybe 5 months. It created an insurgency inside the
Middle East that we are still dealing with today--20 years in
Afghanistan, a mismanaged war from the start. The Taliban is back in
charge.
We ran planes over Libya to release the people from captivity imposed
upon them by Qadhafi, only to unleash a new civil war that killed
thousands upon thousands.
It is amazing to me that my Republican colleagues refuse to learn
lessons. It is amazing to me that my Republican colleagues refuse to
listen to the American people, who do not want American soldiers and
American lives and their taxpayer dollars wasted on endeavors in the
Middle East that are going to make things worse, not better.
I heard my friend Senator Graham in his analysis of the Ayatollah. I
agree with him. But not everything is World War II. Not every effort at
regime change works. In fact, regrettably,
[[Page S788]]
World War II and our operations against Hitler are the exception, not
the norm. Whether it be in Vietnam or Iraq or Afghanistan or Syria or
Libya, over and over again, trillions of dollars in American taxpayer
money has been spent to try to create regime change, and we have been
frustrated and denied in those efforts, and we have lost lives in that
process.
When are we going to learn?
And that is the message that we are sending the Iranian people. I was
in the briefing with my Republican colleagues. I don't think any of us
left that briefing believing that the American military was going to
ride to the rescue of the Iranian people when they arrive in the
streets to protest for freedom.
You can't support a people's revolution from the air. Only ground
forces could support and protect the Iranian people when they show up
in the squares of that nation, protesting for democracy.
But I am telling you that it looks like the plan is to leave the
Iranian people hanging out to dry, because if all we are doing is
dropping bombs on targeted sites inside Iran, if we are not actually
involved in a regime change--and, by the way, we have been told, over
and over again, by this administration that we are not going to quibble
over who runs Iran next, even if it ends up being a hard-line
government. Then we are goading the Iranian people out onto the
streets, with the implicit promise that we will be there with them but
the decision made behind closed doors that we will not.
Six Americans have already died for an illegal war that no one in
this country wants. And 900 to 1,000 people in the region have died.
U.S. Embassies all over the region are under attack. Thousands of Shia
Muslims in Pakistan right now are protesting--a Shia insurgency
targeting the United States in the works. Iranian missile and drone
attacks have hit targets as far away as Cyprus.
Oil prices are up by 9 percent. Gasoline prices had their largest 1-
day increase in 20 years. Natural gas prices are up 45 percent. The
region is in chaos.
American consumers are paying the price, and for what? We still don't
even know the reason for this war. Half the administration is out there
saying: Well, Israel pulled us in.
I hear my friend Senator Graham saying that this was a war of choice,
but half the administration is saying it wasn't, saying that Iran was
going to attack and the only reason that we got involved was because
Israel was going to attack, and the only reason we got involved was
because we feared the blowback from Iran. We were dragged into the war
by Bibi Netanyahu.
Others, like Senator Graham and sometimes President Trump, say: No,
America decided on our own to enter this war.
But then for what? Are we engaged in regime change or not? If you
aren't engaged in regime change, why did you take out the Ayatollah and
all of those who were surrounding him? That clearly is a signal that
you want regime change.
Are we going after their nuclear program or not? We all know that
airpower alone cannot eliminate their nuclear capacity.
And if the goal is not regime change and we accept that new hard-line
leadership is going to take over in Iran, then that is a recipe for
perpetual war, because the only way that you will be able to destroy
their capacity to make missiles and drones is to be permanently running
jets overhead and constantly bombing the new sites that the hard-line
regime sets up.
That is endless war. That is trillions of dollars. And for what? If,
at the end of this engagement, there is harder line leadership in
charge of Iran than at the beginning, then why do we do it? If at the
end of this process, because we won't go in with ground forces, the
nuclear program still exists, why did we do it? If we are going to hang
the Iranian people out to dry and we aren't going to get their back
when they stand up against the regime, why did we do it?
The first several days of this conflict have been criminally
incompetent, shifting rationales for the war; no plan to get American
assets protected, to get Americans out of the region; shifting
explanations for what the purpose of the war is and very mixed messages
to the Iranian people.
History tells us that an air campaign alone will never be successful
in toppling a despotic regime. In fact, without--let me caveat that:
without the serious threat of a ground invasion. History, in fact,
tells us that what is most likely to happen is that it hardens the
resolve of the existing regime; that it ends up in even worse, more
provocative, more dangerous leadership taking hold.
President Trump seemed to think out loud in comments he made
yesterday. He was asked what the worst case scenario was, and, as if it
had just occurred to him for the first time, he said: Yes, I think the
worst case scenario would be that we do all this bombing, we spend a
trillion dollars, a whole bunch of lives get lost, and it ends up with
the Iranians choosing even harder line leadership that are more
provocative and dangerous and deadly in the region.
That is not the worst case scenario. That is the most likely
scenario. And the idea that it is just occurring to him that this thing
may go off the rails, as almost every other engagement in the region
has over the last several decades, should be stunning to all of you.
The alternative then is a ground invasion, which no one in this
country wants. No one in this country wants that. That would kill tens
of thousands of Americans. Yes, it might end up with you being able to
prop up a democratic regime. You might actually be able to get the
nuclear program with a ground invasion, but that is tens of thousands
of Americans dead in the process.
Air campaign: proven to be ineffective to carry out the goals that
are being articulated by the administration. Ground invasion: deadly,
impossible to rally the American people around. This is a no-win
strategy. It is a no-win strategy, and the cost to the American people
is substantial: higher prices, Americans dead, and, frankly, just a
President distracted--a President who seems to care more about running
Venezuela and dropping bombs on Iran than he does care about the
American people.
So I know many of my Republican colleagues, including the last
speaker, have been, historically, incredibly optimistic about the
difference the American military can make in the Middle East, with zero
evidence of that to be the case.
President Trump was elected, in part, because he promised he wasn't
going to get the United States involved in another Middle Eastern war.
People took him seriously, and now he has gotten us involved in the
most significant new conflict in the region in decades.
Let me say one final thing. I am supportive of Senator Kaine's
resolution, but it is not an authorization of military force. Our most
sacred obligation as a Congress is to authorize war, and a President is
prohibited by the Constitution and by the statutes of the United States
from entering into war without that authorization.
I am glad we are having this debate, but it is not a substitute for
an authorization of military force. Even if it fails, that does not
give the President legal permission to carry out this endeavor.
Senator Graham held up a poster in which he showed that there were
130 different occasions in which various Presidents of the United
States have engaged in military actions overseas without the consent of
Congress. That is true. But that doesn't mean that it is legal or
constitutional.
If your neighbor breaks into your house 130 times in a row, that
doesn't mean that it is suddenly permissible by law.
In fact, the outrage gets more acute and more serious as the brazen
lawlessness and unconstitutional actions of an administration get more
regular.
We need to authorize this war. I, frankly, believe that we shouldn't
proceed with other business until we get a commitment to have a debate
on an authorization of military force. I don't think it would pass. I
think it is easier for some of our colleagues to come up with some
procedural justification to vote against the War Powers Resolution than
it is to put their name on a proactive declaration of war.
So I want that debate. I think the Senate has to demand that debate.
I think our legacy will be soured as a body if we let this, the most
significant
[[Page S789]]
military action in the Middle East since the Iraq war, persist without
using whatever leverage we have to have a debate on this war.
It is really hard--I will wrap up. I know I have colleagues on the
floor who want to speak.
It is really hard to encapsulate in one speech how dangerous, how
inane, how illegal, how ill-planned this war with Iran is, especially
just after the first few days. We are likely going to end up with a
worse Iranian regime at the end. We are telling the Iranian people to
rise up on the streets, but we have no plan to support them if they do.
We cannot, with an air campaign alone, take out their nuclear program
if it is buried underground. We cannot, with an air campaign, take out
their missile and drone program, unless we are basically ready to bomb
Iran permanently. That is a trillion-dollar war that lasts years.
We aren't prepared to do the thing that would end the regime and take
out the nuclear program--a ground invasion--because, of course, the
cost of that would be thousands of American lives.
So worse people take over in the end than the Ayatollah. We don't end
their nuclear program. We don't end their weapons program. We leave the
Iranian people out to dry.
And at what cost? Oil and gas prices are spiking. Grocery and
household items won't be far behind. A half dozen families are about to
bury their dead children. The military tells us there is going to be a
lot more casualties to come. This war is going to cost trillions of
dollars. That means no money to lower your healthcare premiums, no
money to fix your kids' schools, because all the money is going to go
to billion-dollar defense companies that profit off of endless war.
This is a disaster, and it is made more of a disaster because we are
not going to actually debate an authorization of military force. This
is not a substitute for that debate, and I think all of my Democratic
colleagues agree.
We should not sugarcoat this. This is already a disaster of epic
proportions, and I am just going to tell you it is likely to get worse.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
Mr. WARNOCK. Mr. President, I have listened very carefully to the
President of the United States, to the Secretary of State, to the
Secretary of Defense--or War, as he likes to call it. I have listened
to other members of the administration, over the last several days,
both in their public statements and in our private briefing.
And what is clear to me is that they don't seem to know why they have
dragged the United States into war.
Furthermore, they have no plan how to get out--no clear rationale, no
clear objectives, no plan for the day after decapitating the brutal
leadership of an awful regime.
Make no mistake, we have the most powerful military force on the
planet and in human history. There is no question that we could go all
around the globe and take out leaders we don't like.
The day after, that is the hard part. That is what we are facing
right now. We have no idea who will step into this power vacuum created
over the last few days, no plan for getting Americans who are in the
region to safety right now. They are being told in so many ways: You
are on your own.
No clear vision of what victory actually looks like, no exit plan.
We pray for the families of the six brave Americans who have already
paid the ultimate sacrifice, our servicemembers who are indeed the best
among us, who go no matter who the President is. They follow orders,
they are the embodiment of courage and patriotism, and that is why they
deserve better than this. And so do the American people.
After nearly 25 years of misadventures, Americans have grown weary of
endless wars in the Middle East. And we know from recent history--not
ancient history--that it is easy to get in, not so easy to get out.
``Mission accomplished.'' Remember that? And yet, years after that
declaration, American soldiers were sent on deployment after deployment
after deployment, carrying in their bodies the visible and invisible
wounds of war; moreover, the body bags kept coming home.
I promised the people of Georgia that I would walk with them even as
I work for them. I have stood at Dover Air Force Base to receive the
bodies of Georgia servicemembers. I have looked into the grief-stricken
eyes of their family members as they gazed at a flag-draped coffin,
dealing with unbearable grief.
There is no worse pain, and there is no more solemn duty for a
Commander in Chief than to send our servicemembers into battle.
Yet I sat and I watched and I listened to the President the other
day, and I was struck by the cavalier way in which he said: People die.
That happens in war. No sense that he feels deep in his soul the
awesome responsibility that he carries. He has entered into this
adventure without much thought about the human cost or the security of
the United States or the stability of the region.
The declaration of war is not a power that the President of the
United States has. The Constitution makes it clear the declaration of
war is the authority and the responsibility of Congress. Presidents of
both parties, yes, they have engaged in military operations, but the
declaration of war belongs to this body.
Well, to me, this looks like a war; it feels like a war. Those six
families are dealing with the consequences of war, and Donald Trump has
said there will be more. Moreover, Donald Trump has said this is war.
Well, I take him at his word. He has called it a war, and yet he
refuses to come before the Congress as the Constitution demands and
make his case for war.
And after yesterday's briefing, I think I know why. Aside from his
own ego and hubris, his authoritarian tendencies, Donald Trump has
refused to come before the Congress and make his case because he has
none. It is exceedingly difficult to explain your rationale when it is
not clear in your own head, when it changes every day.
Is it regime change? Well, they have no idea who will follow. And as
my colleague from Connecticut laid out, history suggests that we may
well end up with somebody worse. We have seen the perils of regime
change.
And then we heard another explanation. Is it to disarm Iran of its
nuclear capabilities? I thought the President said he had obliterated
that a few months ago. Now, he says the regime was an imminent nuclear
threat.
Which is it? The American people deserve to know, and the families of
those six servicemembers who have already died deserve to know.
Is it to destroy their ballistic missile capabilities? Well, what
changed in their capabilities that demanded this action right now as we
are 4 days into this conflict and already this war is spreading?
The American people deserve better than this: No rationale, no
explanation, no strategy, no exit plan.
We must stop this madness because the American people have made it
clear that they want us focused on the healthcare, their everyday
costs, their children, their families. Are they concerned about their
safety? Yes. But while Khamenei was clearly a brutal dictator--and
there are many of them around the world--whether we are actually safer
today than we were last week, given the increased instability that we
are witnessing in the region in real time, is an open question.
And still getting this body to have a real debate on something so
grave, so deeply consequential, is almost impossible, but we must
demand that it happen.
Donald Trump has attacked seven countries in the first year of his
Presidency, more than any President in the modern era. He is out of
control. We must put guardrails on this President. Otherwise, who can
and who will?
My colleagues, our servicemembers are living up to their oath. Let's
live up to ours. Let's put guardrails on this President, stop this
madness, and get focused on the American people.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington State.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, President Trump promised to deliver
Americans lower prices and no new wars. When it comes to broken
promises, it does not get more blatant than that.
First, prices are soaring. Republicans let healthcare premiums
double. They
[[Page S790]]
slashed Medicaid and food stamps. And Republicans allowed Trump to hit
families with the largest tax increase in American history, his tariffs
that are squeezing family budgets and shutting down businesses.
But not content to only break his promise of lower prices, President
Trump is also breaking his promise of no new wars. Trump is charging
ahead with new conflicts without approval from Congress, without any
long-term strategy, and without any concern about who will be paying
for the consequences of his actions in Venezuela and now in Iran.
Trump, who is a billionaire, knows he is not going to pay for the
war. He knows his family is not going to be on the front lines.
Instead, everyday Americans are going to pay the cost of Trump's war
with the higher prices and worse inflation, fueled by oil prices that
are already rising. American families are going to pay for Trump's war
in lost opportunities, as billions upon billions of dollars that could
have gone to building affordable housing or making childcare accessible
or lowering your healthcare premiums are now squandered on more
missiles, set to be launched by a trigger-happy billionaire with no
concept of the repercussions.
I mean, seriously, this President is ordering our kids to be shipped
off into war from his beach club in Florida. That is obscene.
And tragically, American families are already paying the cost of
Trump's war, as the lives of our brave American servicemembers, our
sons and daughters, are lost. My heart goes out to the families who
have already lost a loved one in Trump's war. And my thoughts are with
the rest of our servicemembers on the front lines and their family
members back home, all of whom are watching the news and anxiously
waiting to hear what happens next.
You deserve a clear strategy from any President before he puts you in
harm's way, not a President who shrugs his shoulders about how long
this will go, not a President who doesn't know and doesn't care if he
will put American boots on the ground, and not a Congress led by
Republicans that refuse to do their job and hold the President
accountable to the people before our citizens are put in danger.
You know how I can tell President Trump has no strategy? Well, I have
been listening to him because I have been scouring every statement from
this administration in public remarks, in private briefings for any
inkling of a cohesive strategy, a real plan, even a spark of critical
thinking about what happens next.
No one here mourns the Supreme Leader, but no one in this
administration has a clear answer about what happens next.
I strongly support the millions of Iranians who have been protesting
and speaking out for freedom and democracy, but you don't bring
democracy to the Middle East with bombs. Haven't we learned that by
now?
There is no guarantee that what comes next means a safer world for
all of us or a democracy for the Iranian people.
War should always be a last resort. But, of course, the same people
who came up with a name like Operation Epic Fury can't seem to think of
a plan more nuanced than blow things up, pat themselves on the back,
regardless of the fallout.
Maybe that is why Trump refused to make an address to the American
people, laying out his rationale before this strike. Maybe that is why
he refused to ask Congress to back his plan before he sent missiles
flying--because he didn't have a plan.
That honestly becomes more clear every time a member of this
administration opens their mouth. After all, Trump and his officials
are contradicting themselves, one moment to the next--sometimes in the
same breath. But the truth is obvious. Trump cannot pretend to have a
strategy for this war when he can't even say why he started it.
First, he says: We destroyed Iran's nuclear capability. Then he says:
Just kidding, we have to bomb again.
One minute the administration claims Iran planned an imminent attack
on Americans. Then they admit that was not true.
Trump cannot pretend to have a strategy for this war when he can't
even decide on whether this is about regime change or not. His
Secretary of Defense said in the same breath:
This is not a regime-change war . . . but the regime did
change.
His Secretary of State says the administration wasn't targeting
Iran's Supreme Leader. But then Trump says:
I got him before he got me.
And President Trump has also urged the Iranian people to rise up on
the one hand but suggested he is ready to negotiate with the government
on the other.
And Trump cannot pretend to have a strategy when he doesn't even care
about the timeline. In one sentence he said the conflict is ``projected
4 to 5 weeks,'' but we have the ``capability to go far longer than
that. . . . We'll do whatever.''
Excuse me? ``We'll do whatever?'' That is not a plan. ``We'll do
whatever'' is simply not good enough when American lives are at stake.
And then in a post yesterday, Trump said ``wars can be fought
forever.'' The American people do not want forever wars, not again.
And if you really want to understand just how callous and unserious
the President is about the war he is starting; if you really want to
understand just how little he has thought about the American
servicemembers, Embassy personnel, and everyday Americans he is putting
in harm's way, Trump ended his train of thought the other day by
saying:
I don't get bored. There's nothing boring about this.
Before he actually got bored of talking about the war, he started and
moved right on to a topic he really does care about, his precious White
House ballroom. You want to know where Trump's priorities lie? He has
clearly put more thought and care and planning into this new White
House ballroom than he has with the war with Iran. He will talk about
it any chance he gets.
He has a timeline for the ballroom. He has a budget for that
ballroom. He has an actual long-term vision for the ballroom but not
for the war he started from Palm Beach, FL, not for a war with American
lives on the line.
And that is because the problem is worse than Trump lacking any
strategy for his war with Iran. President Trump also lacks any sort of
concern for the weight of his decisions or any sort of appreciation of
the sacrifice he is singlehandedly forcing on our military families.
Again, that is clear from his own words. What did he say to the
tragedy that American servicemembers were killed by Iran's response?
Trump said:
There will likely be more. . . . That's the way it is.
That is the way it is?
Or asked about boots on the ground, about putting our sons and
daughters in the line of fire, he shrugs it off and says:
I don't have the yips with respect to boots on the ground.
That might be the most dismissive statement I have ever heard by a
President making that about our servicemembers. It is reckless, it is
insulting, and it is up to us here in Congress to say enough.
But we need Republicans to join us. War is not some game. Our troops
are not toy soldiers. Civilian casualties are not nothing. In Iran,
hundreds have died, including more than 100 schoolgirls, children. They
are blameless. Hospitals have been bombed. Shopping malls and homes
have been hit.
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the President this war
could lead to significant American casualties. Already as we know, six
American servicemembers have died. I don't care if the media grades
Trump on a curve. It is not acceptable for a President to shrug his
shoulders at this kind of death and destruction and then provide no
real reason for launching a brutal war of choice. What a disgrace to
the office. What a disgrace to the role of Commander in Chief. The
American people deserve so much better.
If Trump will not rule out boots on the ground, then this Congress
needs to. We have a constitutional responsibility when it comes to war,
and I will never let us forget that.
As I said in 2002 before voting against the Iraq war due to similar
concerns, I understand the consequences of war. I don't shrink from
them. My father was among the first to land in Okinawa as a GI. He was
a Purple Heart recipient. Growing up, we always knew our country may
need to project force to defend
[[Page S791]]
our freedoms. And I know we have a high obligation to the men and women
of our Armed Forces who undertake the hard work of securing our
freedom.
In college, I volunteered during the Vietnam war at the Seattle
Veterans Hospital. Most of the patients were young men my age at the
time who had returned from Vietnam traumatized. I carry that experience
with me every day. It weighs heavily on my mind whenever we are faced
with questions of war and peace.
Putting our men and women in uniform in harm's way, that is an
absolute last resort. We owe it to them to do our due diligence first.
We must have good reasons based on solid intelligence. We must have
clear goals and a plan to achieve them. We must have a serious plan
that puts them in no more danger than necessary, for no longer than
necessary.
We should not gamble American lives on incomplete plans, unclear
objectives, and completely uncertain futures. That was on my mind when
I voted against the Iraq war in 2002, and it is my North Star today as
well.
But there is a big difference between what is happening right now and
what happened back in 2002 before the Iraq war because you see, back in
2002, the administration came to Congress to make its case for war. The
President went to the American people to make that case. And the
Secretary of State spoke to the U.N. I did not agree with this case. I
voted against the war. But Congress--we--all of us--had briefings. We
had public hearings, and we had serious conversations with the
President and his leaders.
Back in 2002, Congress debated; we deliberated; we voted. And this is
critical. We did it before the Bush administration charged into what
was, predictably, a painful war with no end in sight.
But Trump doesn't want any of that. He doesn't want to make his case
to America or our allies or Congress. He doesn't think he has to. Trump
wants to bomb what he wants, he wants to kill whom he wants to, and
start whatever war he wants--consequences be damned.
We saw it in Iran. We saw it in Venezuela. This is not a pattern that
we can ignore. The Founders--Founders of this country--put Congress in
charge of declaring war for a reason. This cannot be left to one man,
certainly not a trigger-happy billionaire who is out of touch with
reality. We--all of us--have to reassert our power as a coequal branch
of government, and we have to do what is best for our country and for
our servicemembers.
America does not want any more wars. It does not want more Americans
killed because of a reckless President that a Republican Congress
refused to check. We know what America wants. All of us do know that.
They want us to keep the promises that Trump broke--lower prices, no
new wars.
I will be voting against this war. I urge all of my colleagues to
join me.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, this weekend, our Commander in Chief made
the most difficult decision a President can make. He ordered young
American servicemembers into action. My friends on the other side of
the aisle are challenging the President's choice, and they are entitled
to do so.
I do find myself amazed, from time to time, with their rhetoric on
the floor this morning and this afternoon. To hear them, apparently,
President Trump should have announced to the world that he was going to
bomb the headquarters of the Ayatollah and destroy the leadership of
Iran who has attacked the United States and killed Americans for over
four decades.
Apparently, if this war lasts as long as 5 weeks, we should agree
that we are going to fold our tents and come home and leave the job
undone. Apparently, the fact that the ruthless drug lord dictator of
Venezuela, President Maduro, is out of office is a bad thing. I
disagree with that, and I wonder how that rhetoric is going to last
through the decades. We will see.
I will vote no on the pending resolution. President Trump decided to
attack Iran. That decision was profound, deliberate, and correct. The
President understands the weight of war. He was clear-eyed about the
risks, and he was honest with the American people. From very early on
Saturday morning he said, ``We pray for every servicemember as they
selflessly risk their lives to ensure that Americans and our children
will never be threatened by a nuclear-armed Iran.''
Indeed, we must be mindful of the brave men and women deployed in
this operation. And certainly, we grieve for the six American service
men and women who died in the fighting. I also grieve for the thousands
of Americans that have died over the last 47 years at the hands of the
brutal Islamist ninth century regime in Iran. I grieve for those. We
care for the civilians caught in harm's way. And yes, we are doing our
best to get them out. War is hell, which is why we prioritize
deterrence and engage only when absolutely necessary. But when we enter
into combat, we must do so deliberately as this administration has
done.
My colleagues ask why are we doing this? The President has given at
least four goals explicitly. We are doing this to destroy Iran's
missile capabilities and their ability to produce missiles. That is a
good thing. We are doing this to annihilate the Iranian Navy; to ensure
the regime can no longer arm, direct, and fund the terrorist activities
that have gone on for over four decades; and to prevent Iran from
getting a nuclear weapon. That is why we are doing it. And that is why
I will vote against this resolution.
The facts on the ground reflect a limited set of goals. We have taken
out their air defenses and missiles systems ahead of schedule. That is
a good thing.
Last week, Iran had 11 ships in the Gulf of Oman. Today, they have
none. That is a good thing. We can expect to see airstrikes continue
until our military objectives are achieved, a task that will take
weeks, not days. But we ought to stay there long enough to get it done.
I think the President's decision was correct. For decades, the
Iranian regime has killed thousands of Americans and thousands of
citizens of our friends and allies and supported those who do. Too many
American servicemembers have lost brothers in arms to Iranian violence.
Too many parents have lost sons and daughters to Iranian aggression.
For decades, Iran has been the world's leading sponsor of terrorism--
the Houthis, Hamas, other armed groups. The regime armed, funded, and
trained terrorist groups across the region. These proxies have attacked
and killed thousands of our people--thousands of our friends.
Iran is a murderous partner of the overall ``axis of aggressors,''
which include China, Russia, and North Korea. They are all pals. They
are all allies.
The Ayatollah was a friend of the tyrants who lead those nations. He
stood with Xi Jinping. He stood with the war criminal Vladimir Putin
and Kim Jong Un. Like them, the Supreme Leader violently suppressed his
people.
The regime was hell-bent on acquiring the world's worst weapons. If
successful, they could have struck our friends, our bases, and, in
time, our homeland, Washington, DC, America.
President Trump, on the other hand, said from day one that he would
keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, and that is a major part of
what this is about. He knew the Ayatollah had to be stopped, and he
came to the correct conclusion that now was the time to do it. Already,
Israel had devastated Iran's proxies. Last summer, President Trump
rained down fire on Iran's nuclear facilities, and, in the past few
months, untold numbers of Iranians have stood up to the regime. The
citizens of Iran have stood up to this murderous regime in a massive
show of opposition to the Ayatollah.
Last Saturday morning, Iran had never been weaker. The time had come
for the United States and for our ally Israel to strike. President
Trump, the Commander in Chief, made that most difficult of decisions,
and I think it will stand the test of time.
This does not have to be a forever war. It is not an aimless exercise
in the Middle East. This is a measured campaign to eliminate the
Ayatollah's threat. It might take time to finish, and we are certainly
not going to put a time limit on it. But that does not make it endless.
It is, instead, a weighty, deliberate, and correct decision made to
protect the United States of America, and I shall vote no on the
resolution.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Justice). The Senator from California.
[[Page S792]]
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. President, we are at war once again. George W. Bush
had his Iraq war, and Donald Trump now has his Iran war.
Make no mistake, with the massive deployment of American military
forces, with the massive amounts of ordnance that are being used, with
the tragic loss of six lives--six servicemembers of the United States--
we are at war.
We are at war, having had no national debate of whether we should
enter into war. We are at war, having had no authorization by
Congress--a power explicitly given by our Founders to the Congress to
declare war. The Founders understood that the executive branch, acting
alone, would grow too fond of war. We are seeing that fear materialize
before our eyes with a President who now has used military force
repeatedly against different countries with different rationales.
Why should we care whether there is a vote in Congress on war? Why
should we care whether there is a debate in the country over war?
We should care because, if we vest the sole power to make war in the
President of the United States--the sole decision to bring a country
into war with the President of the United States--there is no check on
the use of that authority; there is no check on the abuse of that
authority; there is no meaningful way to constrain a President from
getting involved in adventurism around the world that causes our
country an enormous price to pay in lives lost, in treasure lost.
Now, you might say: Well, what about these other uses of military
force by others in the past? Well, of course, with the Iraq war, there
was a vote on authorization. With the Afghanistan war, there was a vote
on authorization. But what about these other uses? Doesn't a President
have a right to use force to defend the country from imminent attack?
The answer is yes. If there is an imminent threat of attack, the
President has the authority. But if it goes beyond anything imminent,
he must come to Congress for an authorization.
So what was the imminent threat here? Well, the short answer is,
there was none. But the administration has given several shifting
rationales--several incompatible arguments--of why they believe there
was an imminent threat.
Let's look at Secretary Rubio, last week, who said that the Iranians
were headed in the pathway to, one day, being able to develop weapons
that could reach the continental United States.
Well, a threat to reach the United States, one day in the future, is
the very antithesis of ``imminent.''
Donald Trump said, on Monday, that the regime had missiles capable of
hitting Europe and our bases, both local and overseas, and would soon
have had missiles capable of reaching our beautiful America.
By ``soon,'' the best estimates are that it would take years. That is
certainly not imminent.
Secretary Rubio, on Monday, had this to say:
There absolutely was an imminent threat . . . We knew that
there was going to be an Israeli action.
He said:
We knew that that would precipitate an attack against
American forces, and we knew that if we didn't preemptively
go after them before they launched those attacks, we would
suffer higher casualties . . . We knew that if Iran was
attacked, even by someone else, they would immediately come
after us and we were not going to sit there and absorb a blow
before we responded.
So, on Monday, Rubio says, because Israel was going to attack, we had
to preemptively attack.
But on Tuesday, the President contradicted his own Secretary of State
and said: ``We were having negotiations with these lunatics''--meaning
the Iranians. ``It was my opinion that they''--meaning Iran--``were
going to attack first. They were going to attack if we didn't do it. .
. . If anything''--the President said--``I might have forced Israel's
hand, but Israel was ready.''
So the President says, no, the imminence didn't come from Israel, and
that he may have, in fact, forced Israel's hand.
On Tuesday, Hegseth took sides with the President and not Marco
Rubio, saying that Trump's explanation was ``100 percent correct.''
OK, so the imminent threat didn't come from anything that Israel was
planning to do. It didn't come from missiles that could hit the United
States that were years away.
What was the other imminent rationale that the administration used?
Well, on February 21, Steven Witkoff said that Iran is ``probably a
week away from having industrial-grade bomb making material.''
Of course, that contradicts what the President said last June, with
the first Iran war, in which he said and reiterated, just this past
Saturday, that ``we obliterated the regime's nuclear program.''
Well, either we obliterated it or we didn't; and if we obliterated
it, it is obviously not an imminent threat.
On Monday, Secretary Hegseth told reporters at the Pentagon that the
Islamic Republic was building sophisticated missiles and other
conventional weapons to shield its plans for a nuclear bomb.
Iran had a conventional gun to our head as they tried to
lie their way to a nuclear bomb.
Again, there was no evidence that Iran was on the cusp of a missile
that could hit the United States, no evidence that Iran was building
the mechanism of a bomb, and no evidence of imminence.
What about regime change? Is that somehow a rationale for war at all,
let alone war without an authorization by the American people and
Congress?
Donald Trump, in 2016, had this to say about regime change. He said:
We must abandon the failed policy of nation-building and
regime change.
Earlier in 2025, Donald Trump said:
Regime change takes chaos and, ideally, we don't want to
see so much chaos.
But, on Saturday, Donald Trump said:
When we are finished, take over your government.
He said this to the Iranian people.
It will be yours to take. . . . Take back your country.
On Monday, Secretary Rubio said:
We would love to see this regime be replaced.
On Tuesday, Donald Trump said ``someone from within'' the Iranian
regime might be the best choice to take over.
But regime change is not an argument that we face as an imminent
threat.
Finally, the last rationale of the administration's was on Saturday,
when the President posted on Truth Social that ``Iran tried to
interfere in [the] 2020, 2024 elections to stop Trump, and now faces
renewed war with [the] United States.''
On Sunday, he cited Iran's effort to assassinate him as a key factor
in ordering the operation that killed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. ``I got
him before he got me,'' Trump told ABC News. ``I got him first.''
So this was, I guess, the final rationale. He is the one to get the
Iranians before they got him.
So here we are with this shifting series of incoherent rationales--
none of them amounting to imminence, none of them posing a direct and
imminent threat to the United States. Now we are at war again, where we
have tragically lost the lives of American servicemembers, where we are
sinking billions and billions of dollars again into a foreign war
without a time constraint, without a plan. This comes at great cost to
the American people, most particularly to our military families.
But we are about to get a request for a supplemental appropriation,
probably in the tens of billions of dollars, to backfill all the
munitions we are using today. That is tens of billions of dollars that
will not go into your healthcare. That is tens of billions of dollars
that will not go to reducing the cost of your housing or your
groceries. That is tens of billions of dollars that will not go into
investing in America. That is tens of billions of dollars that we are
literally blowing up over Iran when we face no imminent threat.
Folks, we have already, essentially, walked away from our most
important power, and that is the congressional power of the purse. The
President rescinds funds, and he impounds funds, and we put up no
murmur of protest. We have walked away from that most important power
in the Constitution that the Founders gave us.
[[Page S793]]
The other most important power they gave us is the power to declare
war. There is no argument that this is anything less than war. This
resolution is about stopping that war, but it is also about reasserting
Congress' vital role as a check on the Executive and on the abuse of
the authority to bring a nation to war.
This is about whether the American people, through their elected
representatives, will have a say when their sons and daughters are put
in harm's way, when the resources of this country are diverted away
from their communities and toward the building of bombs and weapons and
engagement in another potentially endless foreign war.
I thank Senator Kaine for this resolution, and I am proud to work
with him on this. I urge all of my colleagues to support it.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I rise today to oppose the resolution that
my Democrat friends brought here to the floor.
It is very short--only a few pages long--but the operative part of it
is only 18 words. It is on page 3.
It says:
Congress hereby directs the President to remove the United
States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Iran.
Real simple--they are telling the President he must stop and remove
our troops from the conflict that we are currently involved in.
It is important to remember what we are doing here and what the
Democrats are trying to do here. I am going to talk in two different
parts. One is of the War Powers Act and the Constitution. We have all
sat through hundreds of hours of argument on this. So I am not going to
spend a lot of time on it. The third part is how we got here, where we
are, and where we are going, which is a little more interesting, I
think.
In any event, as far as the War Powers Act, it was enacted in 1973 by
Congress. It was designed to try to cut into the constitutional powers
of the President under article II of the Constitution. Every single
President--every one of them since then, Democrat and Republican--has
refused to accept this as constitutional, the War Powers Act. They have
always said that it infringes on the President's article II
constitutional authorities to defend the American people and to
complete the oath they have taken to defend the country.
So 45 of the last 47 Presidents, which is all we have had, have
ordered kinetic acts--just like President Trump has done--without going
to Congress. This isn't new. This has happened in 45 of the last 47
Presidencies. Article II of the Constitution clearly gives the
President not only the right but, indeed, the duty, as does his oath,
to protect the United States.
Having said all of this, the claim is that what the President did is
illegal. Well, if that is what they really believe over here, then what
are we doing here? All we are doing is yakking here. What they should
do is go across the street to the Court and file suit, if it is
illegal, to stop it. They sue him three times every day before
breakfast. What difference does one more lawsuit make? That is what
they should do. That is the remedy if they think it is illegal.
Now, more interesting are the three parts of this: How did we get
here? Where are we in this moment? Where do we go from here?
Forty-seven years ago, this started. What you had was the Iranians
take over our Embassy in Iran. They illegally held and kidnapped and
restrained our diplomats there--a number of them--for 444 days. At that
point in time, 47 years ago, there were two sides. On one side was us,
the United States and Israel. On the other side was Iran and all the
other actors in the region, the Arab countries that surrounded them.
That was the difference from where things were then as to where they
are today.
What has happened over the last 47 years is the Arab countries have
gotten tired of this. They are sick and tired of this.
So where are we today? We are at the point today where you have only
one bad apple left in the region, and that is Iran--and, of course,
their proxies, the three agents--Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis, all
of whom are actually just part of Iran.
When Iran is defeated--and they will be here--the three agents are
gone too. Hezbollah has been badly decimated already. The other two--
Hamas has been almost decimated completely, and the Houthis are still
around. But all three of those are going to be gone when, indeed, Iran
is defeated, which it will be here before very long.
So over these 47 years, what Iran has done--while the Arab counties
have moved away, while they have moved to wanting peace and security in
the region--they have continued to murder thousands of Americans. They
have killed thousands of Americans.
I grabbed the list and was going to bring it out here. It would take
me about half an hour to read all of the sins that the Iranians have
committed over these 47 years.
So we are left in a very, very different place today. The Arab
countries want nothing to do with this, and we are going to deal with a
different Middle East than what we have.
Today, I am more optimistic than I have ever been about the Middle
East. I really believe that when we end this and the Iranian regime is
brought down, we are going to have a Middle East that is going to be
very peaceful, and it is going to be a different Middle East as we go
forward.
The people will look back at this and say: When did that happen?
I think the turning point was the Abraham Accords, but in addition to
that, it has happened in other respects also.
You say: Well, what evidence do you have of that?
You know, during the Hamas war between Israel and Hamas, the Iranians
decided one day to launch 300 missiles against Israel, and they did
that. None of those landed. None of those did any damage because of the
overhead defense they have, but also, you had Israeli pilots, U.S.
pilots, British pilots, and French pilots flying to protect Israel and
take out these missiles.
That is not the big news. On that same night, the big news is that
two Arab countries were also flying. Jordan and the Saudis were flying
to protect Israel from the onslaught of missiles from Iran. That is
clear evidence that the Middle East has changed. It is a different
place today, and it is continuing to be a better place.
Since this most recent war broke out, the Arab countries have decided
to side with us and side against Iran. They are all by themselves.
Iran is decimated. That is where we are at this moment. Their navy is
at the bottom of the sea. Their air force is nonexistent. Yesterday, a
Yak-130 took off in Iran. It lasted just moments in the air before it
was taken out by one of our F-35s. They are done. They are through.
Their missiles and their drone stockpiles are dwindling and dwindling
badly. The strikes are becoming less and less that they are able to put
out there. This is going to end, and it is going to end rapidly. This
is not a forever war--indeed, not even close to it. This is going to
end very quickly.
The Commander in Chief ordered this attack because of the increase in
the manufacturing of long- and medium-range missiles and after trying
to restart the nuclear program that was decimated in the 12-day war.
All this time, they had us sitting at the table, dragging out and
yakking away at negotiations that were going absolutely nowhere. For
that reason, he did what he did, and that is, ordered our brave young
men and women to do what they are doing today.
The message to the regime I would have today for them is, no one is
coming to help. I said that before in the 12-year war; I was right.
Today, the same is true. China is not coming. Russia is not coming.
North Korea is not coming. Cuba is not coming. Venezuela is not coming.
They are not coming to help you, Iran. No one is coming.
But there is one entity left that is trying to help you, Iran regime,
only one on this planet, and that is my friends over here. They have
brought this--and you heard the language I said. They are trying to use
the process of the U.S. Senate to stop our Commander in Chief from
doing what he has set out to do.
No other entity on the planet is attempting to help you, Iran.
Nobody. Nobody except one, and that one is right here. But we are going
to end
[[Page S794]]
that now. It ends now. It ends here in a few moments when we have this
vote.
To our brave men and women, I say: You are fighting to accomplish the
task and the objectives that the President, our Commander in Chief, has
given you. We are proud of you. We are about to help you.
Know this: We have your back. We are about to defeat here on this
floor the last entity that is trying to stop you from doing the job
that the President of the United States has given you. Bless you for
what you are doing.
Bless the United States of America.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, once war begins and American soldiers are
under fire, a rational discussion of the pros and cons of war becomes
nearly impossible. That is exactly why our Founders wrote a
Constitution that demands a debate before the initiation of war.
But there was no debate in Congress, let alone a vote. Americans
awoke to discover their country once again embroiled in a war in the
Middle East. Americans were not asked if they would bear the burdens of
war. Instead, the American people were told, through a Presidential 8-
minute video posted around 2:30 in the morning, that the country was
once again at war.
And, because there was no national discussion about going to war, we
do not know whether ground troops will be used, we have no idea how
long the war will last, we have no idea who will lead Iran after the
death of the Supreme Leader, and we have no idea how many casualties
the American people are supposed to tolerate. We cannot know the answer
to these questions because no one bothered to make the case that war
with Iran was worth the sacrifice.
The Senate only now debates whether hostilities should end after they
have already begun. Before I discuss the merits of this war, I want to
say that my prayers and those of my family are with the troops in the
region and in combat and anyone who may be called to do so. I do not
take lightly that combat has begun, that many have been severely
injured, and that lives have been lost.
It is because of those realities of war that the Constitution grants
the power to declare war to the U.S. Congress--not one individual
sitting in the Oval Office. Giving Congress the power to declare war
was meant to prevent the ability of one person to commit the Nation to
war. When the Nation goes to war, it should be a collective decision,
where a clear rationale for war is articulated. But more importantly, a
debate and a vote in Congress provides the Nation with the only
opportunity to discuss whether a country is aware of and accepts the
inevitable sacrifices of war, especially the loss of life.
The people have been robbed of a public debate. Let me inform the
public, that evasion is intentional.
The congressional leadership--resigned to their own irrelevance--will
gladly hand the President the power to initiate war in exchange for
plausible deniability. The congressional leadership wants to make the
case to the voters that they are not to be held accountable at the
ballot box because they simply played no role in the decision to go to
war. That is not statesmanship. That is shameful.
This country is now at war, which already cost the lives of six
American servicemembers and many more are severely wounded. Those
soldiers and their families deserved a public debate and a vote in
Congress before the initiation of hostilities.
But had Congress debated war with Iran, we would have been wise to
recall the words of John Quincy Adams who, as Secretary of State,
advocated a foreign policy of restraint. ``Wherever the standard of
freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled,'' argued Adams,
``there will [America's] heart, her benedictions, and her prayers be.
But she goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy.''
There is wisdom in Adams's words, but his was not an original
argument. It was George Washington himself who warned in his farewell
address to stay out of the world's endless conflicts.
Congress has tragically forgotten this advice. The history of the
21st century has been one of endless wars in which America perpetually
searches for the next monster to destroy. From Afghanistan to Iraq to
Libya to Syria to Venezuela, the advocates for war tell us that a
country is a threat and that toppling a foreign government is a noble
quest to protect security at home while spreading freedom globally.
While they have recycled their arguments, when they bother to make
them, the results are always instability, chaos, suffering, and
resentment.
The Iraq war was launched under similar false pretenses, and the
consequences of that fateful decision still reverberate throughout the
Middle East to this day. The overthrow of Iraq's secular government and
the collapse of its civil society spurred some of the worst sectarian
violence in modern history and directly led to the rise of ISIS.
Over a decade since the U.S. military intervention that toppled
Muammar Qadhafi, and a year after the fall of Assad, these divided,
unstable countries struggle to escape the cycle of violence and chaos.
And although Nicolas Maduro may have been removed from power by
American military forces, the socialist and oppressive Chavista regime
has not been removed from the Venezuelan government. And, most
tragically, after two decades of war, the Taliban flag flies over
Kabul. America's adventures have not produced the promised utopias, or
even Jeffersonian democracies.
History is replete with examples of wars that quickly escalate beyond
their initiator's intent. While some may think that we maintain
escalation dominance, the spiral of violence can rapidly get out of
control.
America is at war. But Americans don't want this war. They didn't
vote for it. In fact, they voted for just the opposite. Beyond the
documents and words of our Founders, that is why their intentions to
only grant the power to Congress is so important today. If the
President came to Congress to ask for authorization for war, the
people's representatives can do what they were elected to do and
represent them. Debate provides information and answers we do not now
have.
The constitutional separation of war powers is not just some notion
that belongs in our history books. It is a vital part of a democratic
republic. This Congress should be ashamed of how it has allowed this
unilateral march to war. No others in our history have been this
cavalier with our military men and women and tax dollars as they are at
this moment.
I urge my colleagues to join in opposing both this war and the
unilateral actions that were taken without congressional authorization
as the Constitution commands.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Iran
Mr. KAINE. Mr. President, I rise today, I believe, as the penultimate
speaker before we have a vote on the War Powers Resolution, a
bipartisan resolution I filed with Senators Paul, Schiff, and Schumer.
I rise today in support of our troops, who don't deserve to be sent
into war unless this Congress votes that there should be such a war.
I pray for the families who are learning that their loved ones will
not come home. I pray for the families whose children or spouses are
deployed overseas, unable to sleep with worry about them.
Mr. President, I have paid attention over the course of the last 13
months as this President has again and again and again used our troops
to carry out military action without coming to Congress. I have paid
attention to the reasons that my colleagues are giving who want to give
the President an E-ZPass around the Constitution.
When we had a vote last summer about the attack on Iran at the end of
the Israeli 12-day war, by the time the vote had been called up, that
bombing mission was in the rearview mirror, and so my colleague from
Idaho said: There are no hostilities. The hostilities are over, so you
should vote against the resolution on that ground.
When we called up an effort to constrain the President from illegally
striking boats in international waters, the legal rationale asserted by
my colleagues and the White House to vote down a War Powers Resolution
and end-run the Constitution was: These are pinprick strikes that don't
rise to the level of war. Only if it is war must the White House come
to Congress.
When I brought forward a resolution a month or so ago to say no war
in Venezuela without a vote of Congress,
[[Page S795]]
again my colleague from Idaho said: This isn't war. It is over. It was
one and done. There are no troops left in Venezuela.
There has been one reason after the next to give the President an E-
ZPass lane around the Constitution.
Well, today, we are dealing with something different. You can't stand
up and say this is a pinprick that doesn't lead to the level that would
be characterized as war. You can't stand up and say this is one and
done and no troops are engaged in hostilities against Iran.
Members of the Senate, this is war. The President of the United
States has called it a war against Iran. The head of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff, General Caine, has called it a war against Iran. Secretary
Rubio, our Secretary of State, has called it a war against Iran.
All of the excuses that you have advanced to give the President an E-
ZPass around the Constitution and suggest he needn't come to Congress
all evaporate because this is a war. It is a war.
Many of my colleagues know that during the classified briefing
yesterday--I can't reveal information given to me, but I can say what I
said. I challenged the body, including the administration witnesses:
Your escalating pattern of military action without seeking approval
convinces me that you believe you never need to come to Congress to
wage war against anyone anywhere.
I hoped that someone might refute my point and tell me I am wrong and
they would come to Congress, but no one did.
So here we are in a war that has cost American lives, that is leading
to chaos throughout the region, that threatens to grow bigger and
bigger and bigger. And I am asking the Senate to do what the Framers of
the Constitution said we should do--debate and vote about matters of
war.
What are the arguments now that the other side has made to suggest we
should vote down this resolution?
First, they say that Iran are bad actors. On that, we would agree. If
you put in a resolution ``Iran has carried out a lot of bad actions,''
you would get a 100-to-zip vote in this body on that resolution. But
being a bad actor is not an E-ZPass around the Constitution. It does
not allow us to take our sons and daughters into war and risk their
lives without a debate and vote. That is not a sufficient rationale.
The other rationale--and you just heard my colleague make it--was
that the effort to bring a War Powers Resolution, a bipartisan
resolution, before this body is somehow partisan; it is this side
trying to come to the aid of the regime.
There is nothing partisan about the Constitution. There is nothing
partisan about caring for our kids and wanting to have a debate before
they get sent into harm's way to risk their lives.
This is not a partisan issue on our side. We are basically asking a
question of the entire Senate--indeed, of the entire Nation: Have we
learned nothing from 25 years of war in the Middle East?
Mr. President, 14,000 American troops and contractors were killed in
Iran and Afghanistan. More than 65,000 American troops and contractors
were injured in these wars. These nearly 80,000 people were from every
walk of life, every State and territory, every race, every age, every
rank, every religion, every gender. They only have two things in
common: A, they had a patriotic desire to serve their country, and B,
their futures were dramatically affected--in some instances,
eliminated--because of 25 years of war in the Middle East.
Someone suggested yesterday that this resolution was our effort to
gum up the work of the--what is the work of the Senate? What is the
work of the Senate if it is not to discuss the circumstances under
which we should send our kids into war?
In addition to the lives lost of American troops and contractors and
those injured, hundreds of thousands of innocent civilian deaths in
Iraq and Afghanistan, more than $8 trillion was spent that could have
been spent on American healthcare, on American housing, on American
education--spent on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and what did we
get for it? What did we get for it? If people think 25 years of war in
the Middle East was a good thing or produced something, I hope they
would come to the floor and tell us what we gained from it.
This effort to force a vote is not about partisanship; it is about
the Constitution. But even more importantly, it is about the lives of
our troops and the question of what, in fact, we got from 25 years of
war in the Middle East and whether we should continue that ``forever
war.'' The President tweeted out the phrase ``forever war'' today when
he talked about the munitions that we have.
We don't need illegal wars. We don't need forever wars. We don't need
more wars in the Middle East.
Let me say this and conclude and yield to our Democratic leader. I
have said this to my colleagues before. I came to this body in 2013
with the experience of being a Governor and watched my Virginians
repeatedly deployed, time after time after time--Active Duty, Guard,
Reserve, DOD civilians, Virginia National Guard--into the wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan. And I went to the deployments, and I went to the
homecomings, and I went to the wakes, and I went to the funerals, and I
signed the condolence letters that all Governors sign when they get the
bad news that one of their own has lost their lives in war.
And when I came to this body in 2013, I said that I would do anything
I could in my power to stop any President--Democrat or Republican--from
waging war without coming to Congress and that I would especially do
anything I could to stop an unwise, unnecessary war that puts our
troops' lives at risk for no legitimate reason. Colleagues who have
been with me since 2013 know that I have upheld that standard against
Presidents of both parties. When President Obama wanted to use military
action in Syria to punish the Syrian regime for using chemical weapons
against its own citizens, even though I was his friend, I stood up and
said: You cannot do that without a vote of Congress.
Presidents can defend against incoming attack, protect against
Houthis firing at our ships in the Red Sea. Presidents can act when
there is a preexisting congressional authorization to go after
terrorists who Congress voted the President should be able to act
against. But in this instance, there is no congressional authorization
on the books that would authorize this military action. And as my
colleagues have amply demonstrated, the administration and their
shifting set of rationales, and even in a classified setting, could
produce no evidence--none--that the United States was under an imminent
threat of attack from Iran.
It is easy to try to dismiss this by saying: Oh, it is about
partisanship. And those who would say that say it so they don't have to
grapple, I believe, with their own sense of unease about what we are
starting on right now.
Perhaps this war will be over in a few weeks or a few months. We pray
that it will be, but that is what we thought about the war in Iraq when
we claimed that the mission was accomplished, when we claimed that we
were met as liberators. And yet, years and years and years later,
troops from all of our States were still coming home deeply wounded and
affected, both physically and in their mental health, from those wars,
from seeing what happened to them and their friends. Some never came
home.
If there is one thing we do that we have to get right, it is this. It
is this. We can't afford to hide under a desk and let any President--
Democrat or Republican--send our best and brightest, our own kids, into
war to risk their lives unless we have debated it, we have determined
it is in the national interest, we have voted and thereby put our
signature and our thumbprint on the notion that it is worth sending our
best and brightest to risk their lives.
I urge my colleagues: As this is escalating from pinprick strikes and
one-off operations now into full war, even called war by the President
and his chief advisers, let's stand up and do what the Constitution
requires us to do.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on my resolution.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schmitt). The minority leader.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, first, let me thank my friend from
Virginia for his stellar leadership on this issue, not just this year
but through the last
[[Page S796]]
decade. He is an inspiration, I think, to all of us. I also want to
thank Senators Schiff and Paul for joining me and Senator Kaine in this
important resolution.
Now, Mr. President, today, Senators face a choice: Stand with the
American people, who are tired of war in the Middle East, or side with
Donald Trump, who bumbled America into another war most Americans
fiercely oppose.
Voting on matters of war is one of the most solemn votes a Senator
can take. This is about whether or not Senators are ready to send your
sons and your daughters into harm's way. If there was ever a moment for
Senate Republicans to take a stand, it is now.
The last thing the American people want or need is another war in the
Middle East. But if you listened to Secretary Pete Hegseth's press
conference this morning, one thing is crystal clear: America is at war,
with no plan, no strategy.
In his own words, Hegseth said, ``We are just getting started.''
Hegseth said, ``We are accelerating, not decelerating.'' And in the
wake of six brave Americans who died in uniform, Trump simply says,
``There will likely be more. That is the way it is.''
This, my colleagues, is madness. Americans spent the last two decades
fighting and dying in the Middle East. Parents watched their kids
shipped off to foreign lands--so many lives lost--so many billions
wasted--so much suffering and anguish that scarred an entire
generation.
Why is Donald Trump hell-bent on making history repeat itself? Why is
he plunging America headfirst into a war that Americans do not want and
which he cannot even explain?
Enough is enough. The American people deserve a say, and that is what
our resolution is about. We must act to stop Trump's belligerence.
The American people will be watching how Senators vote. History will
judge this Chamber for how we act.
To my colleagues, all of my colleagues: It is time to make a stand.
We must stop another war in the Middle East. Support our resolution.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
____________________