Mr. WARNER. But I ask my good friend: Is there a word in this resolution--and I hold myself responsible for the words in this resolution. Is there any word, is there any sentence, is there any paragraph that exceeds the authority given to the President of the United States in the Constitution which you love and defend so dearly?
Mr. BYRD. Absolutely. Absolutely. This whole piece, this great expenditure of paper, is nothing more than a blank check given to the President of the United States
to use the forces of this country, the military forces, in whatever way he determines, whenever he determines, and where he determines to use those forces to ``defend the national security interests of the United States against the threat posed by Iraq, and restore international peace and security in the region.''
Now, Madam President, you don't need all this paper. You have a vast waste of verbiage here. Just make it one sentence. Make it one sentence, may I say to my friend from Virginia, one sentence. If we are going to make it a blank check, let's make it a blank check right upfront, without all of these flowery figleaves of ``whereas'' clauses, and simply say that the President has this power. Give it to him and we will put up a sign on the top of this Capitol: ``Out of business.'' Gone home. ``Gone fishing.'' Put up a sign: ``We are out of it. We are out of business. We, here in the Congress, are out of business,'' may I say to my friend.
Now, I know his intentions are the best. I believe that. I respect him. I have served with him. He is a reasonable man. I consider it an honor to be a Member of the same body. He is always a man with whom one can debate, disagree, agree, and he does not carry it out of this Chamber. He is a good man at heart. He loves his country. He has served his country. He is loyal to his country, sometimes too loyal to his party, may I say, which cannot be said of this Senator from West Virginia. Party is important, but not all that important.
But I say, instead of just passing this resolution, why don't we say upfront: Let's give this man downtown a blank check. Leave it all to him. Give it to him lock, stock, and barrel. We'll go home. Put a sign on the Capitol: ``Out of business until we are called back by the President under the Constitution.'' We will go home. We will go fishing, play golf, study, read, write our memoirs--``out of business.''
Why don't we just do that, instead of going through this kind of blank check, and covering it over with figleaves and ``whereases'' that are flowery--flowery--beautiful? Oh, they are pretty figleaves, they are pretty ``whereases.'' But that is what this all amounts to: Nothing; a poison pill covered with sugar. That is all we are doing.
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I say to my friend, the President of the United States, as I read the Constitution, has the authority, at this very moment, to employ the men and women of our Armed Forces in the defense of our Nation.
Mr. BYRD. No. That Constitution does not say that. No, no, no.
Mr. WARNER. I think it is implied in there.
Mr. BYRD. Oh, no, no.
Mr. WARNER. As Commander in Chief, if he believes an attack has been made on this country, or that an attack is imminent which he believes he has to preempt, he has the authority to use those forces, and we don't have to pass this.
Mr. BYRD. No. Wait a minute. The Senator is saying two different things now. I say that under this Constitution, this President--any President--as Commander in Chief of our country, and as the chief executive officer of this country, has the inherent power to repel any sudden, unforeseen attack upon this Nation, its territories, its people. He has that because Congress may not even be in session. Congress may be out for the August recess.
Mr. WARNER. That is correct.
Mr. BYRD. The Framers foresaw there might be that
situation where Congress might not be here and the President would have to take action. But this resolution is saying something far different. That is not what this resolution says.
Read it. It does not say that the President has the inherent power to repel an instant, an unforeseen attack on this Nation. It does not say that. Now, I go along with that. But I do not go along with this. This says:
The President is authorized--
We are handing it right over, right now, if we pass this. We are not saying come back tomorrow or next week or next month or next year.
The President is authorized--
That means here and now, as soon as he signs his name on this piece of paper.
The President is authorized to use all means that he determines--
He determines--
to be appropriate.
What ``he determines to be appropriate.'' The Senator from Virginia may not determine that to be appropriate. What ``he determines to be appropriate, including force. .....'' That means the Army, the Navy, the airplanes, everything--``including force. .....''
In order to do what?
in order to enforce the United Nations Security Council Resolutions referenced above--
Well, what is that: ``referenced above''? You have to go through all these beautiful figleaves to find out what resolutions are referenced. And even some of those resolutions have long gone out of existence. They no longer exist. And yet are we going to raise from the dead, like Lazarus, U.N. resolutions that have long ago gone out of existence, that no longer have life in their bodies?
No. We say we are going to revive them. Like the Shulamite woman in the Bible, we are going to revive her son.
..... referenced above--
``Referenced above''? They do not tell you specifically what resolutions.
defend the national security interests of the United States against the threat--
What threat? Is it a direct, immediate, imminent attack on this country? Then, that is one thing. But ``against the threat posed by Iraq. .....''
A threat determined by whom? Who determines what the threat is?
against the threat posed by Iraq, and restore international peace and security in the region.
What a broad grant of naked power. To whom? One person, the President of
[Page: S9960]
the United States. This Constitution itself refutes--it refutes--this resolution right on its face.
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, if I could say to my dear friend, on the desk are two resolutions. The one that was originally introduced by Mr. Daschle and Mr. Lott--
Mr. BYRD. All right.
Mr. WARNER. I say to you, sir, that is the one to which you referred.
Mr. BYRD. Let me look at that one.
Mr. WARNER. Fine.
Mr. BYRD. Let me read from it.
Mr. WARNER. But the one I drew your attention to, I say to
my good friend, is the one drawn by Mr. Lieberman and myself, which language is somewhat changed. This is the one that is presently the subject of this debate.
Mr. BYRD. Yes. Let me read it.
I am sorry Mr. Lieberman has joined in this resolution, but he is a Senator, and he has the perfect right to join any resolution he wants to join.
But I think the American people want somebody who stands for something. They are tired of this wishy-washy going along and saying: We have to get it over, and we have to put it behind us.
We are not going to put this thing behind us. The President has chosen to make this the battlefield. Iraq: He has chosen to make that the battlefield. His administration has chosen to do that. His chief political adviser, Karl Rove, advised the Republican members of the National Committee in January to do that, make that the battlefield. So they have chosen to do it. And you will find a way to get away from it. You can't do it.
So let's fight that battle on that battlefield, and in so doing, let's draw attention to the shortcomings of this administration when it comes to the domestic issues and the problems facing this Nation: health issues, the issues of homeland security. That is where the battle ought to be fought. But if it were fought on that battleground, the eyes of the people would not be deflected during an election.
Well, here is what the verbiage says:
The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines--
``He.'' Madison said that was too much, too much trust, too much temptation, too great to be turned over to any one man. And that is precisely what we are doing here.
The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq--
Why, Iraq has posed a threat for decades now. But how imminent and how much is it directed toward the heart of America?
He can do anything he wants and say: Well, Congress said I could defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq, and Congress also included the language ``and enforce all relevant U.N. Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.'' How much looser can that be, ``enforce all relevant''? What do we mean by ``relevant U.N. Security Council resolutions''?
A resolution may have long ago expired, gone out of existence by virtue of the happening of some circumstance. Yet like Lazarus, we are going to say: Lazarus, come forth, and Lazarus came forth when Jesus called him to come forth. He came forth wrapped in his grave clothes. And Jesus said: Loose him and let him go.
We can't say that about U.N. Security Council resolutions. We can't say ``resolutions come forth; come forth in your grave clothes. Loose that resolution and let it go.'' We can't say that. That is what we are saying here, ``enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.''
This is, plain and simple, a blank check given to the President of the United States. I won't touch it. With all respect to those Senators who believe in what they are doing, they believe in it as sincerely as I believe they are wrong, but they believe they are right. I don't say anything with respect to their integrity. I don't challenge their honor. I don't challenge for a moment their dedication to their country. I say it is wrong.
We are giving to the President of the United States a blank check, and Congress cannot do that. Congress should not do that. Where is the termination? Where is the deadline? Where is the sunset language that says after this happens, this resolution shall no longer exist, this resolution we are over and done with? There is nothing. This goes on to the next President of the United States.
Show me if I am wrong. It goes on to the next President of the United States, and the next one. We are going to have a Democratic President at some point in this country. Then where will my friends on the other side of the aisle be? I know where they will find me. They will find me right where I am now, if God lets me live. But that is what we are doing. We are unwittingly passing a blank check, not just to this President but to any future President, until such time as the Congress acts to repeal or amend this resolution.
I am not willing to do it. Put a sunset provision in it. That would help some.
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I thank my colleague. I thank him for recognizing what he was reading from previously is separate from the resolution which I coauthored with Senator Lieberman which he now has read. That is the subject. I say most respectfully to my colleague, I firmly say there is nothing in this resolution, of which I was privileged to be a coauthor with others, which in any way transcends the authority given to the President of the United States by this Constitution. We have a disagreement on that.
Mr. BYRD. Will the Senator join his friend from across the mountains, across the Alleghenies, in putting language into this resolution which he advocates here, would he join me in putting language in here which indubitably states, unquestionably states the authority of the Constitution, which requires that Congress declare war, not be impinged upon by this resolution in any way?
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, that is a challenge. I will
consider that. But let me just say, earlier today I recounted how this body has only used that power to declare war five times. Yet we have sent forward men and women of the Armed Forces into harm's way upwards of 200 times. I say to my friend, that is a challenge.
I assert very firmly, there is nothing in this resolution that goes beyond the authority the President has. This President, as well as any other President, could act tomorrow without the specific authority of Congress, if he felt it was necessary to use the troops to defend the security interests of this country.
Mr. BYRD. The Constitution does not say that. That is exactly what my friend is wanting to read into this Constitution. I don't mean just my friend, I mean the others who support his view.
Will the Senator yield?
Mr. WARNER. Yes.
Mr. BYRD. He has said this Nation has issued a declaration of war but five times. That is right. There have been 12 major wars in which this country has participated. We have had five declarations of war by this Congress out of those 12 wars. But out of six of the remaining seven, the President acted on authorizations by statutes. They were not declarations of war as such, but they were statutes from which the authorization could be drawn. So that is 11 of the 12. The 12th was in Korea, and Congress did not declare war. Congress did not authorize the forces of this country being injected into that conflict. That was done by Harry Truman, and he is my favorite Democratic President during my career, not my favorite all-time Democratic President.
By the way, Eisenhower is my favorite Republican President during this time.
Back on the subject, there were 12 major wars. The distinguished Senator from Virginia has mentioned the number 200. He has said we have had military forces involved in over 200 conflicts. Yes, in over 200, but they were not major conflicts. They were minor skirmishes having to do with cattle rustlers, having to do with pirates, having to do with minor engagements. No, they were not major conflicts.
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, the war in Vietnam did not have a declaration. That was not minor, and you know that well. There were over 50,000
[Page: S9961]
casualties. The war in Korea, in which I had a very modest role in the Marine Corps, was not modest. There were over 50,000 casualties.
Mr. BYRD. I said for the war in Korea, we did not have a declaration. Mr. Truman put our troops there, and we didn't have a declaration.
Let's go back to the war in Vietnam. I was here. I was one of the Senators who voted for the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. Yes, I voted for the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. I am sorry for that. I am guilty of doing that. I should have been one of the two, or at least I should have made it three, Senators who voted against that Gulf of Tonkin resolution. But I am not wanting to commit that sin twice, and that is exactly what we are doing here. This is another Gulf of Tonkin resolution. I am not going to vote for that this time. No. Don't count me in on that.
I see my friend, the Senator from Massachusetts. I join with the Senator from Virginia in wanting to hear what that Senator has to say. That is my answer to the Senator.
Mr. WARNER. I respect this. We just have strong differences. I think we have stated them.
I would like to read this bit of history. I was going to save this for next week. You have raised properly the classification of this current set of facts as presenting the preemptive issue. But let me read you--I will hand this to you, but it will be in the RECORD--use of the military forces of the United States in engagements which have the facts that could be judged as preemptive action by our Presidents: In 1901, in the Colombia-Panama engagement; 1904, 1914, and 1965, the Dominican Republic; 1912, Honduras; 1926, Nicaragua; 1958, Lebanon; 1962, naval quarantine of Cuba; 1983, Grenada; 1986, Libya; 1989, Panama, Just Cause; 1992, Somalia; 1998, Sudan; 1998, Iraq, Desert Fox, when President Clinton ordered that; 1999, Kosovo. You and I had that resolution together, brother Senators, on Kosovo.
We did the right thing.
Mr. BYRD. We may have been brother Senators on the resolution which brought us out of Somalia.
Mr. WARNER. I remember that well.
Mr. BYRD. I thank the distinguished Senator. He has been very liberal----
Mr. WARNER. Not liberal but prepared.
Mr. BYRD. He was gracious in his yielding to me.