Transcripts For CSPAN2 Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20141203 :

CSPAN2 Key Capitol Hill Hearings December 3, 2014

Vote you. The presiding officer the nays are 28 and the motion is flood. The clerk will report the nomination. The clerk gerald j. Pappert of pennsylvania to be United States district judge for the Eastern District of pennsylvania. The presiding officer under the previous order, the time until 5 30 p. M. Will be equally divided in the usual form. The senator from virginia. Mr. Kaine madam president , i have nine unanimous consent requests for committees to meet during todays session of the senate. They have the approval of the majority and minority leaders and i ask unanimous consent the requests be agreed to and the requests be printed in the record. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Kaine madam president , next monday will mark four months since the president commenced military action in syria and iraq against isil. As of december 2, Operation Inherent resolve which the Administration Calls a war on isil has involved more than 1,100 Coalition Airstrikes in iraq and syria, the vast majority carried out by american airmen and women. The president has authorized currently 1,400 u. S. Ground troops who are deployed in iraq to train and advise regional forces. The president has authorized an additional 1,500 u. S. Troops to serve in that train and advise capacity. This mast monday, 250 paratroopers from the 82nd airborne decision of fort bragg, North Carolina were sent to iraq and the total cost of the operation to the u. S. Taxpayers is in excess of 1 billion. There have been three deaths of americans serving in Operation Inherent resolve. On october 1, marine Corporal Jordan spears of memphis, indiana was lost at sea while conducting Flight Operations over the persian gulf. On october 23, marine Lance Corporal sean neil of riverside, california, died in iraq. On december 1, air force captain mcdeboys of new castle, colorado died in iraq. Senator king and i visited qatar in october to see the combined air Operation Center in action and we saw i saw many virginians there working with colleagues from all Service Branches and many other nations in Coalition Nations that are directing the airstrike campaign. So, madam president , lets not make any mistake about this. America is at war. The number of air and Ground Troops deployed is steadily creeping upwards every day. Our troops are dying. And the fiscal cost to american taxpayers is growing every day. But, madam president , this is a most unusual war. While all the activities of war are occurring, theres a strange conspiracy of silence about it in the white house and in the halls of congress. The president has not offered any proposed authorization for the war despite his suggestions that one is needed. Congress has not debated on, taken Committee Action on, or voted on the ongoing war. The house is contemplating ajune for the holidays on december 11 without saying anything about an ongoing war. And because neither the president nor congress has undertaken the necessary public debate over the war, the American Public not have had the chance to be fully indicate bed whats at stake and why its in our interest in to ask our troops to risk their lives thousands of miles away. We owe it to our troops serving abroad, troops who are engaged in war even as we think about recessing and leaving washington on december 11 for the holidays, to do our job and to have a debate and vote about the war that our constitution demands. Let me make an earnest request to our president and to my colleagues in congress. To the president i had previously taken the floor to strongly argue that the president needs new Legal Authority to conduct the war on isil. When the president spoke to the nation on september 10 he said that he would quote welcome a congressional authorization. And on november 5 he affirmatively asserted that a new congressional authorization was needed and that we quote engage congress in passing one. But to this date four months after the initiation of war, the administration has not even been willing to present a draft authorization of the mission to congress. In testimony yesterday at the Armed Services committee, no d. O. D. Witness could recall a single other instance in which a president told congress of the need for a war but failed to present a proposed authorization spelling out the dimensions of the military mission. Instead, the president has persisted in a war that is not within the scope of his article 2 powers, that is not authorized by any treaty obligation, that is not justified under either of the congressional authorizations passed in 2001 or 2002. The president s unilateral action has even extended beyond the 60 and 90day timing requirements created by the war powers resolution of 1973. And the president s willingness to push a war without Engaging Congress has even violated his own solemn and wise pronouncement of just one year ago. Quote i believe our democracy is stronger when the president acts with the support of congress. This is especially true after a decade that put more and more warmaking powers in the hands of the president while sidelining the peoples representatives from the critical decisions about when we use force close quote. And so i request our president , make good on your promise to engage congress. Do what other president s have done. Demand that we debate and vote on an authorization and that we do it now. The votes are here in this body to support the president. I am a supporter of the need for military action against isil and i know that as a position held by a Strong Majority of the senate, a Strong Majority of the house, there is no reason for the president to not demand that we actually have that debate and have that vote. And to my congressional colleagues, i have a similar request. Lets not leave this capitol without a debate and vote on this war on isil. Weve gone four months without any meaningful action about this war. First, we were told that congress would get to it after the murderterm elections. And so we midterm elections so we recessed for seven weeks in the middle of a war without saying one thing, shirking our constitutional duties and now many are saying that we need to delay until after new year before having any meaningful discussion of this war. And so the unilateral war would extend to at least five months and in all likelihood longer before Congress Gets around to any meaningful discussion of the isil threat and what we should do to counter it. Giving this president giving any president a greenlight to wage unilateral war for five or six months without meaningful debate or authorization would be deeply destructive of the legitimacy of the labor of our government, it would be deeply disrespectful of our citizens, and it would be especially disrespectful of the troops who are risking their lives every day while we do nothing. Madam president , i yield the floor. A senator madam president . The presiding officer the senator from maine. Mr. King madam president , senator kaine handgun spoken eloquently about events daff. Id like to speak for a few moments about events of 200 plus years ago. On tuesday, august 17, 1787, at the Constitutional Convention in philadelphia, the delegates debated the question of war. They debated it passionately and with a sense of history and human nature. And they understood the propensity of the executive any executive throughout history, a prince, a king, a potentate, a sultan to lead their country into war for good reasons for no good reasons. They understood that this was a basic question before the body, before the Constitutional Convention. And, madam president , i would assert that the framers knew what they were doing. Interestingly, in the first draft of the constitution the clause in article 1 section 8 says congress has the power to declare war says Congress Shall have the power to make war. That was the first draft. The debate was about whether congress could effectively make and execute war. They wisely, i believe, realized that that was impractical given the nature of congress, the large number of representatives, and the exigencies of war so they left the power to be commander in chief in the commander in chief executive. They also recognized the commander in chief executives inherent power to repel an attack on this country. But in all other cases, what the constitution says is very clear. Article 1, section 8, the Congress Shall declare war. And there was some discussion about this, and some people said, well, we dont want to tie the hands of the executive but others made it more clear. Mr. Ellsworth of connecticut these are from madisons notes, a fascinating source about the history of the constitution. These were the notes taken the day of the debate. Tuesday, august 17, 1787. Mr. Ellsworth of connecticut, it should be more easy to get out of war than into it. He understood this principle. Pierce butler of South Carolina said the executive should have the power to repel sudden attacks. Thats common sense. But then he would religion gerry of massachusetts put it succinctly, i never expected to hear in a republic the motion to empower the executive alone to declare war. And thats the fundamental issue thats before us today. And then george mason from virginia later in the debate used a wonderful phrase that i think aptly captured what the framers were after. He said, im for clogging rather than facilitating war. And thats what were supposed to do, is to debate, discuss and have the people engaged in a discussion before this country is committed to war. Now, the constitution in the preamble makes very clear that one of the fundamental purposes of this government, or any government, is to provide for the common defense. Nobody questions that. Neither senator kaine for myself nor anyone else whos talking about this issue questions, a, whether we should be debating this and, b, that its our solemn responsibility to provide for the common defense. I happen to think, as senator kaine does, that what the that the fight against isil is worthy of national attention, worthy of National Effort and should be debated and circumscribed through some form of authorization in this body. Madam president , there has not been a declaration of war by the Congress Since 1942. And ill conclude with the observation that power doesnt spring from one branch of our government to the other overnight or in some flash of inspiration or change. I would argue more aptly, it oozes from one branch to the other. Not necessarily through executive usurpation, as through congressional abdication. And for us to go home, to take a recess, to say, we dont really want to be talking about this, we dont want to be responsible for this i think is unfair to the American People. Its unfair to the people who are being put into harms way. And its unfair to the and not responsive to the basic principles of the constitution. We owe it to our country to have this debate. And its one that i believe is important and is constitutionally based. We are very good here in congress about not making decisions and then criticizing the executive for what they do. This is an opportunity where we have the power, the constitutional power and the constitutional responsibility, to discuss, debate and authorize the executives actions against this terrible thug. I believe that it is our responsibility to do so. To not do so is simply one more sliding away, one more giving away of our Constitutional Authority to the executive that i think is in detriment not only to the constitution itself clearly but also to the interests of the American People. Thank you, madam president. I yield the floor. I note the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Quorum call quorum call the presiding officer the republican whip. Mr. Cornyn i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Cornyn madam president , ever since november 4, this last election some three or so weeks ago, a number of people have speculated what a new majority a republican majority of the United States senate would mean. Working together with our republicans in the house and hopefully with a president who had learned something, had heard the message that the American People were sending him on november 4 because he was the one who said its his policies that were on the ballot. And i think the vote of the American People was pretty loud and clear what they thought of those policies. So its pretty clear they want a new direction. I want to just say that when people have asked me what my constituents expect, my 26. 5 million constituents in texas, ive said well, they want us to demonstrate we can govern. They want us to demonstrate that we can actually solve some of the problems confronting our country. And they primarily deal with how do we unleash this American Economy, get it growing again, creating jobs and opportunities so people can find work, provide for their families and pursue their dreams. I actually think thats what the senior senator from new york, senator schumer was saying the other day at the National Press club, that we need to focus on the needs of the middle class and the wage earner who has seen stagnant wages and seen their costs, health care, energy and other costs go up and their check shrinking and having to live on less. Thats not the American Dream that i think most people have bargained for. But the truth is that no Political Party, no branch of the government can govern on its own. The fact is even when you have republican majorities in both the house and the senate, we still have divided government with president obama in the white house, and he is not constitutionally irrelevant. In fact, he is critical in terms of actually getting things done. Now, my hope is that we can find things we can Work Together on. I believe there are, that republicans and democrats can vote to put legislation on the president s desk, but then hes got a choice to make, either to sign that legislation into law or to veto it, and then we have a decision to make as to whether we want to try and whether we can override his veto. But the truth is none of us can govern on our own, and what has been troubling to me since the election is president obama seems to think he can govern on his own without regard to the congress. And now part of the consequences are the debate going on in the house and here in the senate about whats the appropriate response made to what has been widely seen as an overreach by department, particularly when it comes to his executive action on immigration. Something that circumvented the congress and acted as though he could do this alone and there wouldnt be any consequences to it. Well, we know one thing for sure and that is the president cant appropriate money, and thats why were having this conversation now, but there are going to be other ramifications and consequences. I hope one of those consequences is not that we fall back into the dysfunction that we have experienced the last few years where we have shown ourselves incapable of working together and getting things done. All we can do is all we can do. As a senate, as a congress, we cant make the president do anything he is bound and determined not to do, but what we can do is our job, so when i have said and others have said, well, with the new majority in the senate, we have to show we can govern. The truth is we cant govern by ourselves. The president cant govern by himself, we cant govern by ourselves, thats the constitutional separation of powers in the division of responsibility that we must embrace together. I dont know where the president has gotten this idea that he thinks he can govern on his own. But for 225 years of constitutional our constitutional norms have said otherwise and experience has shown otherwise. So if we want to make Real Progress on improving our broken immigration system, we actually saw a bill passed out of the senate. The president said he is frustrated at the timetable in the house, but there continues to be a bipartisan desire, i believe, to fix our broken immigration system. If we want to reform our tax code, i think thats something we ought to be getting down to work on. The fact of the matter is we have the highest tax rate in the world, which is making america less competitive in terms of attracting investment and jobs, and it discourages people, multinational corporations headquartered in the United States from bringing back the money they have earned overseas because they dont want to have to pay taxes twice, what they have earned on their income overseas and then pay double again when they bring that money back home. And we ought to look at what kind of tax code makes sense for us, and it incentivizes investment and job creation in the United States and not be content with a system that discourages that. I think there is bipartisan support for doing what we can to shore up medicare and Social Security. We have all seen the numbers, the aging baby boomers and more and more people retiring. These young people unfortunately are being left withholding the bag. Were going to be okay. People my age, my generation, but future generations will not be okay unless we do our job now to deal with medicare and Social Security and ma

© 2025 Vimarsana