Despite Trump’s Resistance, Lawmakers Push Ahead With New AUMF

A bill to repeal and replace the 2001 and 2002 war authorizations is slowly making progress in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In this Monday, Nov. 6, 2017 photo, U.S. Marines prepare to build a military site during a sandstorm in western Anbar, Iraq.
AP Photo/Khalid Mohammed
March 1, 2018, 8 p.m.

The Trump administration has made clear that it believes it has all the legal power it needs to continue waging its current military campaigns abroad. But that hasn’t stopped lawmakers in both parties from pressing forward with a new war-authorization bill.

Last week, the Defense and State Departments sent letters to Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine stating that they have the ability to keep U.S. troops in Iraq and Syria indefinitely under a pair of Authorization for Use of Military Force measures Congress approved in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Kaine and others on Capitol Hill have long argued those authorizations are outdated and need to be replaced.

Lawmakers have tried time and again in recent years to reassert their authority on this matter to no avail. Still, Foreign Relations Committee senators say legislation to repeal and replace the 2001 and 2002 war authorizations is gradually progressing as more members join in on the negotiations and signal an increasing willingness to compromise.

“It’s a slow grind, but believe it or not, it’s still moving along in a positive way,” Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker said. “I don’t want to, you know, oversell here, but we’re getting to a pretty good place.”

Kaine said activity on the AUMF bill he introduced with Republican Sen. Jeff Flake last year was “dormant” for the last few months, but that right before the Senate left for recess last week, more members of the committee began to express interest in the legislation. Kaine noted that one Democrat and one Republican had been added to the “working group,” but declined to specify who. Flake said there are no new cosponsors yet and the working group still isn’t fully formed.

The main hurdles in crafting new AUMF legislation remain largely the same: geography and time. The 2001 version gave the president blanket authority to use force against those responsible for the 9/11 attacks, while the 2002 resolution was specific to Iraq. Kaine and Flake’s legislation is narrower. Their AUMF would provide the administration with the ability to engage in military action against al-Qaida, IS­IS, and the Taliban, and would expire after five years.

The Foreign Relations Committee held public and private hearings with administration officials on the AUMF last year. Before a bill markup occurs, senators involved in the discussions say they are still tweaking some of the language on the bill and need further input from the administration on some legal definitions. Kaine said he also wants to hold a closed briefing with administration officials to get an understanding of their strategy for Syria.

“We’re just negotiating the last couple things,” Flake said. “I think there is growing support for it.”

Aside from Kaine, several other senators also cited the expanded U.S. mission in Syria, where roughly 2,000 troops are stationed, beyond fighting the Islamic State as a reason that momentum for a new AUMF has picked back up.

“We have so overextended beyond those authorizations that it’s well past time for us to take it up again,” said Sen. Chris Coons, a Foreign Relations Committee Democrat.

Another Democrat on the panel, Sen. Ben Cardin, said he’s now “willing to look at a compromise language” on a new AUMF to bring more members on board because it is becoming more “urgent” that Congress pass one.

“I think it is challenging, but there are active discussions,” Cardin said.

Even some Republicans supportive of President Trump dismissed the administration’s argument that it already has the necessary authority to continue engaging in Syria and Iraq, and said a new AUMF is needed.

“Every single president has said that since George Washington,” GOP Sen. James Risch, another Foreign Relations member, said with a laugh. “There’s always an argument over the constitutional restraints on the second branch.”

Several members of the House also attempted to shine a light back on the issue this week. Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee and Republican Rep. Justin Amash held an ad-hoc hearing Tuesday on the need for a congressional debate over a new AUMF. Lee successfully added an amendment to repeal the 2001 AUMF to a defense appropriations bill last summer, only to see it stripped by GOP leadership before reaching the House floor.

Meanwhile, a separate group of senators is challenging the president’s authority in Yemen. Democratic Sens. Bernie Sanders and Chris Murphy and GOP Sen. Mike Lee introduced a resolution Wednesday to invoke the War Powers Resolution and end U.S. military involvement in the three-year Yemen civil war. The Obama administration initially used the 2001 AUMF as justification for intervening in the conflict.

There likely won’t be much action on this measure. But Corker said he hopes his committee will take up Kaine and Flake’s broader AUMF legislation soon.

“We’ve got a couple little hurdles, one little thing in the bill itself we’re trying to resolve, and again, it can be resolved,” Corker said. “I think we’re getting pretty close.”

What We're Following See More »
AVOIDS SHUTDOWN WITH A FEW HOURS TO SPARE
Trump Signs Border Deal
6 days ago
THE LATEST

"President Trump signed a sweeping spending bill Friday afternoon, averting another partial government shutdown. The action came after Trump had declared a national emergency in a move designed to circumvent Congress and build additional barriers at the southern border, where he said the United States faces 'an invasion of our country.'"

Source:
REDIRECTS $8 BILLION
Trump Declares National Emergency
6 days ago
THE DETAILS

"President Donald Trump on Friday declared a state of emergency on the southern border and immediately direct $8 billion to construct or repair as many as 234 miles of a border barrier. The move — which is sure to invite vigorous legal challenges from activists and government officials — comes after Trump failed to get the $5.7 billion he was seeking from lawmakers. Instead, Trump agreed to sign a deal that included just $1.375 for border security."

Source:
COULD SOW DIVISION AMONG REPUBLICANS
House Will Condemn Emergency Declaration
1 weeks ago
THE DETAILS

"House Democrats are gearing up to pass a joint resolution disapproving of President Trump’s emergency declaration to build his U.S.-Mexico border wall, a move that will force Senate Republicans to vote on a contentious issue that divides their party. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Thursday evening in an interview with The Washington Post that the House would take up the resolution in the coming days or weeks. The measure is expected to easily clear the Democratic-led House, and because it would be privileged, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) would be forced to put the resolution to a vote that he could lose."

Source:
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, DRUG FORFEITURE FUND
Where Will the Emergency Money Come From?
1 weeks ago
THE DETAILS

"ABC News has learned the president plans to announce on Friday his intention to spend about $8 billion on the border wall with a mix of spending from Congressional appropriations approved Thursday night, executive action and an emergency declaration. A senior White House official familiar with the plan told ABC News that $1.375 billion would come from the spending bill Congress passed Thursday; $600 million would come from the Treasury Department's drug forfeiture fund; $2.5 billion would come from the Pentagon's drug interdiction program; and through an emergency declaration: $3.5 billion from the Pentagon's military construction budget."

Source:
TRUMP SAYS HE WILL SIGN
House Passes Funding Deal
1 weeks ago
THE DETAILS

"The House passed a massive border and budget bill that would avert a shutdown and keep the government funded through the end of September. The Senate passed the measure earlier Thursday. The bill provides $1.375 billion for fences, far short of the $5.7 billion President Trump had demanded to fund steel walls. But the president says he will sign the legislation, and instead seek to fund his border wall by declaring a national emergency."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login