[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 14]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 19896]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  ON THE INTRODUCTION OF LEGISLATION TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF FUNDS FOR 
    MILITARY OPERATIONS IN IRAN WITHOUT CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. MARK UDALL

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 19, 2007

  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam Speaker, today I am introducing a bill 
to prevent the Bush Administration from launching war in Iran without 
prior congressional authorization. It is a companion bill to S. 759, 
authored by Senator Jim Webb of Virginia.
  This is not a unique proposal--several of our colleagues in the House 
have introduced resolutions expressing the sense of Congress that the 
President should not initiate military action against Iran without 
first obtaining authorization from Congress.
  This legislation would establish a binding legal limit on the ability 
of the President to expend funds to commence military action against 
Iran in the absence of explicit prior congressional authorization.
  I think several factors require Congress to insist that the President 
meet that requirement before committing this country to another war.
  Those factors include this administration's inability or 
unwillingness to engage with the Iranian regime, the stated interest on 
the part of many administration officials and political supporters in 
attacking Iran, and the U.S. deployment of additional aircraft carrier 
groups to the Persian Gulf.
  These have led many--likely including the Iranian regime--to think 
the U.S. is intent on preparing a military strike against Iran. While 
that perception could be far from the mark, I think there is no doubt 
that there are increased risks of confrontation brought on by 
heightened tensions in the region.
  If we've learned nothing else from the war in Iraq, we should have 
learned that saber rattling doesn't get us far--especially when the 
tough rhetoric comes from an administration with a history of 
mismanaging the war in Iraq, a war that is in its fifth year of 
straining our military and depleting our Nation's blood and treasure.
  As I said in 2002--before voting against the resolution authorizing 
war in Iraq--I am reluctant to vest in the President all discretion 
about when and where America will go to war. I thought then and I think 
today that Congress, which has the constitutional responsibility to 
declare war, must play a more significant role in authorizing the use 
of our armed forces in what could become a full-scale war.
  My purpose in introducing this legislation is to reassert Congress's 
constitutional responsibility and to remind the Bush Administration of 
the important role that Congress plays when it comes to matters of war 
and peace.
  I recognize that the President, as commander-in-chief, must have some 
flexibility in deciding whether to allow U.S. forces to conduct 
intelligence gathering and to directly respond to attacks or possible 
attacks from Iran. That's why my legislation makes exceptions for these 
contingencies.
  Madam Speaker, my introduction of this legislation should not be seen 
as evidence that I deny the reality of the potential danger Iran 
presents to our country, our allies, and others.
  The prospect of an Iran with nuclear weapons is a matter of serious 
concern for America and the rest of the world. Since the revelation of 
its nuclear program, Iran has defied the international community by 
continuing to work to advance it, Iran's president has publicly stated 
his intention to ``wipe Israel off the map,'' and there is evidence 
that Iran is arming insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  So it is no surprise that there are also reports--as recently as last 
month--that the internal debate on Iran among the White House, State 
Department, and Defense Department is heating up, and that the mood is 
shifting back toward military action against Iran. My bill responds to 
those reports by reasserting the basic principle that Congress must 
consent before the president can take such action.
  Sending our troops into harm's way is a decision that affects all 
Americans, as we've learned the hard way in Iraq. So before this 
president makes any more rash decisions about going to war, I believe 
he must come to Congress for authorization to commence military action.
  The bill I am introducing today--like its companion in the Senate--is 
intended to do one thing: to restore the balance between the executive 
and legislative branches with regard to authorizing large-scale 
military activities. It is a balance that needs restoring after the 
mismanagement of the war in Iraq, and it is a balance we should be 
watching closely as some in the Administration continue to discuss 
presidential authority to wage war in contravention of the 
Constitution.

                          ____________________