[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 17104-17105]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



   AUTHORIZING USE OF MILITARY FORCE IN RESPONSE TO TERRORIST ATTACKS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, the senseless human tragedy caused by the 
craven terrorist acts of September 11, 2001, weigh heavily on our minds 
and will do so for many days, months, and years to come.
  Many have said our Nation will never be the same. I agree. Our Nation 
is stronger, more united, and prouder than possibly at any time in our 
history. The outpouring of grief and offers of assistance, both here 
and abroad, have been comforting. The terrorists may have collapsed our 
buildings; but in response, we are building a stronger America.
  Our thoughts are with those who have lost loved ones and with those 
whose loved ones are still missing. Our thoughts are with those who 
have undertaken the difficult, dangerous, and heroic task of rescuing 
and treating the wounded and recovering the bodies of those who were 
killed.
  As the gravity of the situation sinks in, our thoughts have also 
turned to those responsible for these atrocities. Our Nation must take 
action against those responsible, including those who provide safe 
havens and financial support for terrorists. U.S. actions to exact 
justice must be deliberate, decisive, and effective.
  However, the United States must be careful not to indiscriminately 
attack civilian populations in other nations, which will only further 
the cause of the terrorists and perpetuate a cycle of violence.
  Decisions on war and peace are the most profound decisions Members of 
Congress can ever be required to make. This is the second time in my 
career I

[[Page 17105]]

have been confronted by such a decision, something I hoped would never 
come.
  In our desire to show support for the President, we must be careful 
not to cede our constitutional duties now or set a precedent for doing 
so in the future.
  Article I section 8 of the Constitution grants Congress the authority 
``to declare war.'' This right was recognized by the earliest leaders 
of our Nation. In 1793, President Washington, when considering how to 
protect inhabitants of the American frontier, instructed his 
administration that ``no offensive expedition of importance can be 
undertaken until after Congress have deliberated upon the subject, and 
authorized such a measure.''
  In 1801, President Thomas Jefferson sent a small squadron of frigates 
to the Mediterranean to protect against possible attacks by the Barbary 
pirates. He told Congress that he was ``unauthorized by the 
Constitution, without the sanction of Congress, to go beyond the line 
of defense.'' It further noted that it was up to Congress to authorize 
``measures of offense also.''
  I believe maintaining this solemn congressional prerogative to send 
our young men and women into battle is critical to protecting the 
delicate balance of power between the legislative and executive 
branches. This balance of power was carefully crafted by our founders 
in Philadelphia more than 2 centuries ago and has allowed the United 
States to remain one of the most stable and enduring democracies in the 
world.
  There was a time when such a power was threatened. Congress enacted 
the War Powers Resolution of 1973 in response to the military 
activities of successive Presidents while waging war in Korea and 
Vietnam. The War Powers Resolution reaffirmed the prerogative of the 
legislative branch under the Constitution to commit our Armed Forces to 
hostilities and declare war.
  I had strong reservations about earlier drafts of the proposed 
resolution that authorized the use of force in an unprecedented, open-
ended manner, far beyond that necessary to respond to the terrorist 
acts on our people, even far beyond that ceded to FDR in World War II. 
This is not a partisan issue for me. I would have opposed similar 
resolution language under a President of my own party.
  This is an institutional concern for me. The earlier drafts ceded too 
much authority to the executive branch. In fact, one of the earlier 
drafts had provisions nearly identical to the Gulf of Tonkin 
Resolution, which had led to the unaccountable use of U.S. military 
forces in Vietnam.
  But it is important to recognize that President Bush already has the 
authority to respond to the attacks.
  The War Powers Resolution in section 2(c) recognizes the 
constitutional power of the President as Commander in Chief to 
introduce U.S. Armed Forces into hostile situations under certain 
circumstances.
  Section 2(c) says the President can introduce U.S. Armed Forces into 
hostile situations pursuant to a declaration of war, specific statutory 
obligations or, in this case, a national emergency created by an attack 
upon the United States territories, possessions or its Armed Forces. 
Two of those conditions have been met.
  The President has the authority he needs to respond to the current 
crisis without setting the precedent of ceding additional war power 
authority.
  Given his existing authority to respond in the event of an attack 
upon the United States or Armed Forces, we must be careful in granting 
further or ceding further constitutional powers.
  The use of force resolution before us today is not exactly as I would 
have written it. However, for the most part, it restates the authority 
I already believe was granted to the President under section 2(c)(3) of 
the War Powers Resolution.
  The reference in the resolution to section 5(b) of the War Powers 
Resolution I believe creates a little confusion, but it is my reading 
of the resolution that nothing in this act supersedes congressional 
authority under the War Powers Resolution and the President will still 
be bound by the reporting and consultation requirements. Congress will 
reserve the right to review those actions, as it should be under the 
Constitution.
  Make no mistake, Congress will stand united behind our young men and 
women who may well be put soon in harm's way, and the President of the 
United States as Commander in Chief. We pray that he uses the awesome 
power of the United States with great deliberateness and with wisdom.

                          ____________________