DIRECTING THE PRESIDENT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 5(c) OF THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION, TO REMOVE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FROM HOSTILITIES WITH IRAN

On 2026-05-20, Representative Randy Fine (R-FL-6) delivered a floor speech titled "DIRECTING THE PRESIDENT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 5(C) OF THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION, TO REMOVE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FRO" in the House.

DIRECTING THE PRESIDENT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 5(c) OF THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION, TO REMOVE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FROM HOSTILITIES WITH IRAN

Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 86 (Wednesday, May 20, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 20, 2026)] [House] [Pages H3648-H3652] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] {time} 1330 DIRECTING THE PRESIDENT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 5(c) OF THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION, TO REMOVE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FROM HOSTILITIES WITH IRAN Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of May 20, 2026, I call up the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 86) directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House. The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House today, the concurrent resolution is considered read. The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows: H. Con. Res. 86 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1544(c)), Congress directs the President to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran, other than those elements of the Armed Forces that may be necessary to defend the United States or an ally or partner of the United States from imminent attack provided that the President complies fully with the requirements of section 5(b) the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1544(b)) with respect to any such use of the Armed Forces, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or a specific congressional authorization for use of military force against Iran. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The concurrent resolution shall be debatable for 1 hour, equally divided and controlled by Representative Mast of Florida and Representative Meeks of New York, or their respective designees. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mast) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) each will control 30 minutes. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Florida. General Leave Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous materials on the resolution under consideration. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida? There was no objection. Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, it is not clear to me what exactly my colleagues are trying to do. We were on this merry-go-round last week, and last week my colleagues across the aisle here voted to say let's remove all U.S. forces from any hostilities with Iran, while at the same time they acknowledged the imminent threat that Iran poses against us. They said Iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism and Iran wants to attack the United States and our allies with ballistic missiles, terrorist proxies, and obtain a nuclear weapon to do so, as well. They acknowledge all of these things, but then they say let's be a United States of America that does not respond to threats against the United States of America. I don't understand it. I look forward to hearing the explanation from my colleagues, although it will be unexplainable. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of my War Powers Resolution. Yes, here we go again. Today marks the fourth time this body will vote on a resolution to end President Trump's hostilities against Iran. After months of war, I ask the question: What has changed? I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that certainly nothing has changed for the better. Gas prices are now approaching $5 a gallon. Airlines are cutting routes and struggling under rising fuel costs. The price of groceries, Mr. Speaker, and everyday goods continue to climb as more families are struggling to make ends meet. Why? It is all because the Strait of Hormuz, which was open before the war, now sits at the center of escalating disruption and economic uncertainty. When the President of the United States was asked whether he was thinking about the financial struggles of everyday American people, not the ultrarich like him and his buddies, he doubles down on a failed war. What was his response? ``Not even a little bit . . . I don't think about Americans' financial situation. I don't think about anybody.'' Here is what else hasn't changed, Mr. Speaker: The same Iranian regime remains in place. Iran retained its coercive capabilities, and Iran's nuclear program remains where it stood after the so-called 12- day war. Iran still possesses its highly enriched uranium and nuclear know-how. Much of its missile and drone capability remains intact, and Tehran retains leverage over the global economy. Trump started this war, and he started it without congressional authorization and without a credible endgame. He still cannot explain how it ends, and the situation grows worse by worse every day. Yet, my colleagues across the aisle continue to repeat the same argument. Perhaps for me the most absurd is that Iran posed an imminent threat. We have heard Mr. Mast, the chairman of the committee, say that Iran has posed an imminent threat for 47 years. Mr. Speaker, 47 years is not imminent. The administration has not even attempted to demonstrate any imminent threat existed, let alone one that would have justified launching this war under the Constitution or the War Powers Resolution. The law is very clear: If the President wishes to continue hostilities beyond 60 days, Congress must authorize them through an authorization for use of military force. If my Republican colleagues believe this war is justified, they should bring an AUMF to the floor. Yet, they have not. Absent congressional authorization, President Trump, by law, is required to withdraw U.S. forces from hostilities. It is clear to the entire world that even without a deep-water Navy, Iran is still capable of closing the Strait of Hormuz. None of this war's shifting objectives have been achieved. If and when Republicans try and claim, as Donald Trump sometimes does, that somehow killing the 86-year-old Khamenei, only to replace him with a much younger Khamenei, is proof of regime change, I would invite them to explain that to their constituents at a townhall meeting and see how seriously it is received by their constituents. We have heard my Republican colleagues say that we should trust the Commander in Chief. Mr. Speaker, no President, Democrat, or Republican, deserves a blank check, especially one who has said Iran's nuclear program was ``obliterated'' and then used that same threat to justify this war. This Commander in Chief has said the war is over, the war is won, that it is not a war, it is a war, that it is a mini war or an excursion. All of these things are what this President has said. We are trapped in a war that won't end because an incompetent President launched it thinking of only his own ego, while failing to prepare for the consequences. Diplomacy is the only exit from this, not more bombing, not more bluster, not waiting for the President to stumble into a cease-fire he can brand as a victory. That doesn't work. Yet, my Republican colleagues are just sitting on their hands doing everything they can to cover for this President. Mr. Chairman, what I would love to do on the Committee on Foreign Affairs is to at least hold a hearing. We have not held one single public hearing, not one witness, not 1 hour of testimony on a war that has cost the [[Page H3649]] American people tens of billions of dollars. Congress cannot abandon its constitutional responsibility over matters of war and peace, and we should not be reducing ourselves to be a rubber stamp. {time} 1340 That is why we must vote ``yes'' today: for our brave men and women in uniform who are in harm's way; for the family paying almost $5 a gallon who can't wait another week; and for the small business owner watching their costs spiral because this President started a war with no plan, with no authorization, and with no end in sight. All the polls show that Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, the American people, want this over. They are concerned about another forever war. Mr. Speaker, above all, and most importantly, the Constitution of the United States of America, what we swore an oath to--not to a President, not to anyone, to the Constitution of the United States of America. That Constitution requires us to take action, to have a vote on this floor, and let the American people know where we stand. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, this week, my colleague wants to make the argument about an imminent threat. I am glad he wants to have that debate. Last week, my colleague voted, as I outlined already, to say literally that Iran is the leading state sponsor of terror and Iran wants to attack the United States and our allies with ballistic missiles, terrorist proxies, and, if obtained, a nuclear weapon. I would ask my colleague across the aisle: You voted to say Iran was an imminent threat. How do you define an imminent threat? You voted for it last week. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Himes), the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee. Mr. HIMES. Mr. Speaker, here we are again, debating something that is not debatable. It is in the Constitution that every single one of us pledges to uphold. You can read it. It says that the Congress authorizes military action. It doesn't matter how good or bad or evil or close to a nuclear weapon a foe is. What matters is that the Constitution says we debate and approve military action. Today, of course, we are well beyond the 60 days of the start of this hostility. Not 

Referenced legislation: HCONRES86, HCONRES86