mr. mccaul: thank you, mr. chairman. the backbone of the proposed new system to integrated six towers will not be in place until january 13, in place of it, the new border technology plan has been developed that abandons the fixed sensor tower, the original s.b.i. plan and replaces it with multiple technologies. the new plan consists of a reduced number of sensor towers and visions in the s.b.i. net plan and in their place lower cost technologies such as mounted radar and camera systems, affordable image systems and thermal imaging devices. the secretary said that technology will not be deployed to cover the entire southern border until the year 2025. i believe that is unacceptable. this amendment provides funding for readily available technology that we can deploy quickly to secure the border before that time frame. and with that i yield back, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. any member seek time in opposition to the amendment? for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama r

mr. mccaul. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. mccaul: i thank the gentleman from florida for yielding time and commend him for this legislation. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of this bill and in defense of the constitution. the founding fathers clearly intended for congress to have the power to commit this nation into armed conflict. article 1, section 8 of the constitution states that congress shall have the power to declare war. our first commander in chief, george washington, knew that when he said the constitution vets the power of declaring war in congress, therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure. that is exactly what this bill is about. and president obama, when he was a senator, knew this when he said that the president does not have the power under the constitution to authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation. he went on further to say t

mr. mccaul. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. the gentleman from florida for yielding time and commend him for this legislation. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of this bill and in defense of the constitution. the founding fathers clearly intended for congress to have the power to commit this nation into armed conflict. article 1, section 8 of the constitution states that congress shall have the power to declare war. our first commander in chief, george washington, knew that when he said the constitution vets the power of declaring war in congress, therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure. that is exactly what this bill is about. and president obama, when he was a senator, knew this when he said that the president does not have the power under the constitution to authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation. he went on further to say that no law can g

mr. mccaul. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. mccaul: i thank the gentleman from florida for yielding time and commend him for this legislation. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of this bill and in defense of the constitution. the founding fathers clearly intended for congress to have the power to commit this nation into armed conflict. article 1, section 8 of the constitution states that congress shall have the power to declare war. our first commander in chief, george washington, knew that when he said the constitution vets the power of declaring war in congress, therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they have deliberated upon the subject and authored such a measure. that is exactly what this bill is about. and president obama, when he was a senator, knew this when he said that the president does not have the power under the constitution to authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation. he went on further to say tha

mr. mccaul. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. caul: i thank the gentleman from florida for yielding time and commend him for this legislation. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of this bill and in defense of the constitution. the founding fathers clearly intended for congress to have the power to commit this nation into armedonflict. article 1, section 8 of the constitution states that congress shall have the power to declare war. our first commander in chief, george washington, knew that when he said the constitution vets the power of declaring war in congress, trefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure. that is exactly what this bill is about. and president obama, when he was a senator, knew this when he said that the president does not have the power under the constitution to authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation. he went on further to say that no

mr. mccaul. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. k the gentleman from florida for yielding time and commend him for this legislation. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of this bill and in defense of the constitution. the founding fathers clearly intended for congress to have the power to commit this nation into armed conflict. article 1, section 8 of the constitution states that congress shall have the power to declare war. our first commander in chief, george washington, knew that when he said the constitution vets the power of declaring war in congress, therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure. that is exactly what this bill is about. and president obama, when he was a senator, knew this when he said that the president does not have the power under the constitution to authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation. he went on further to say that no law can

mr. president, i want to thankrm mccaul lead from massachusetts for his hard work on this resolution and a understand he t will be introducing itnt, i immediately and mr. president, i hope the majority leader of thed senate will schedule a debate on and vote on this resolution as soon as possible. floor. arizona i want to thank the senator from arizona for his important and tr counter to the political currents of the day some ofn which have been expressed in the other body and elsewhere and iio thank him for thinking about the strategic interest of the country ahead of some of the political interest with respectt to the national election. there are many occasions where d differently when a president either republican or democrat has engaged american forces in one way or another without thetn authorization within that 60 of days or even outside of the 60-day parameters of the waract. powers act. the fact is we had a number of s military actions, panama, libyaa 1986, grenada, 1983, iran, 1981, to 1980, haiti, 1993, persian gulf, 1987, 88, lebanon, 1982, and then subsequently kosovo, 1999, b

mr. roberts for five minutes. >> good morning chairman mccaul, ranking member clark and distinguished members of the subcommittee. thank you for inviting me to testify today and share with you the department of defense efforts to address and governed territories to preclude the use by terrorists a stevens. a dot recognizes such efforts require close interagency coordination in fact cultivation has was reflected by the panel here this morning. eliminating terrorist safe havens is a core element of the defense department's counterterrorism efforts. as the secretary gates has written and said on the numerous occasions, in the decades to come, the most lethal threat to the united states safety and security are likely to emanate from states that cannot adequately govern themselves or secure their own territory not from strong states or pure competitors. dealing with a fractured and failing states is in many ways the main security challenge of our time. the focus today on pakistan, yemen and somalia highlight de diverse challenges such states can present. today's strategic calculation demands the u