The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“THE NEED FOR 2002 AUMF REPEAL AND THE PEACE ACT” mentioning the U.S. Dept of State was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H3085 on June 24.
The State Department is responsibly for international relations with a budget of more than $50 billion. Tenure at the State Dept. is increasingly tenuous and it's seen as an extension of the President's will, ambitions and flaws.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
THE NEED FOR 2002 AUMF REPEAL AND THE PEACE ACT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cloud) for 5 minutes.
Mr. CLOUD. Mr. Speaker, it is past time for Congress to reassert its role in the war powers discussion.
I proudly joined many of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle last week in voting to repeal the 2002 AUMF. This AUMF provided for military operations in Iraq, an Iraq that is far different from the one we know today.
The goal was to defend the United States against the threat posed by an Iraq of 20 years ago, specifically, that of Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein was captured in December of 2003 and executed 3 years later.
Despite ousting Saddam Hussein, the 2002 AUMF has remained on the books. Less than one-fifth of the current Members of the House of Representatives were present on that original AUMF vote. As you can imagine, many Members have entered Congress and left the Halls of Congress without ever taking a vote on the 2001 or 2002 AUMFs.
Repealing the existing AUMFs, like the one from 2002, can be a step in the right direction in Congress reasserting its Article I powers, but we should not stop there. We need to rethink how we approach military authorizations.
A few weeks ago, I introduced the Preventing Endless Armed Conflict and Engagement Act, or the PEACE Act for short. The goal of this bill is to ensure regular oversight is being conducted on future military authorizations.
First, this bill would require each military authorization, or AUMF, to terminate after 2 years. This is because the Constitution stipulates that military funding should not extend past 2 years. This would also ensure that every Member of Congress has the opportunity to weigh in on current military operations.
The PEACE Act would also set standards for drafting military authorizations. For instance, each authorization would need to set a geographic scope on where the military force can be used. A clear objective would need to be established for each authorization, and the countries and groups that the U.S. troops are authorized to fight must be listed.
Additionally, the Department of Defense and the State Department would be charged with publishing an annual, unclassified report on existing military operations. This report will include information such as whether the military is meeting their objective, the number of casualties, and total cost. This will assist Congress in making the needed decisions that we have to make regarding AUMF reauthorizations. Finally, the DOD and State Department will be required to brief Members of Congress on the contents of this report once every 6 months.
It is critical that new Members of Congress, with new constituencies, have their chance at providing input into military operations. Many Members came to the floor last week to reiterate the importance of updating these existing AUMFs instead of repealing them. While I supported the repeal, I do hope that any updated or future AUMF incorporates elements from the PEACE Act.
Future AUMFs should be more concise and relied on for only a few years, not for a couple decades.
I look forward to working with Members from both sides of the aisle on future reforms to Congress' war powers authority.
____________________
