The Sift Here’s what we’re Sifting today

Rand Paul protests war authorizations, stalls defense bill

by Evan Wilt
Posted 9/12/17, 11:14 am

WASHINGTON—Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., threatened Monday to delay nearly $700 billion in defense spending if Congress won’t reconsider its war authorizations for Afghanistan and Iraq. Paul staged a sit-in on the Senate floor Monday evening after the upper chamber passed a motion to proceed on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) in an 89-3 vote. The tally ended procedural debate on the bill and moved the Senate closer to a final vote of passage. Paul demanded the Senate vote on an amendment he filed to repeal the 2001 and 2002 Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) passed after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq are the longest wars in U.S. history. “I will object to all procedural motions and amendments unless and until my amendment is made in order and we vote on these wars,” Paul posted on Twitter. Paul can’t single-handedly prevent the Senate from passing the NDAA, but his protest could force an additional 30-hours of debate in an already log-jammed Congress. President Donald Trump announced earlier this month he plans to deploy nearly 4,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan without specifying when they might come home.

Read more from The Sift
Evan Wilt

Evan is a reporter for WORLD Digital based in Washington, D.C.

Read more from this writer


  • Fuzzyface
    Posted: Tue, 09/12/2017 05:29 pm

    Since the result would be basically wasting the Senate's time, this seems more like a toddlers temper tantrum than a worthwhile statement.

  • TXfamily
    Posted: Wed, 09/13/2017 03:34 pm

    Aren't there some times when a "tantrum" would be justified?

    Like if the government were to spend so much money that the debt devoured and surpassed our GDP, or if the president tried to send soldiers to die in an undefined war where we don't even know what the goal is.  If those things were to happen....

    Oh, wait.

  • TXfamily
    Posted: Wed, 09/13/2017 03:38 pm

    Wasting the Senate's time might not be a bad idea either.  If they have too much of it they might spend even more money or tear the Constition into even smaller pieces.

    -Seth, age 17

  • Yishmeray
    Posted: Tue, 09/12/2017 08:31 pm

    Senator Rand's solo attempt to derail the warfare/warfare state (by whatever means) may be quixotic, but I applaud it. Those rascals in the Senate could use any amount of their time wasted.

  • Allen Johnson
    Posted: Tue, 09/12/2017 09:21 pm

    Rand Paul is constitutionally right on this.  For too long, wars have been the prerogative of the executive branch with little more than cheerleading by Congress.
    I'll add that the military-industrial complex plays into about 1/4th the nations economy. The way it works is that to criticize it is to be labeled unpatriotic.  And of course, most congressmen have a piece of the pie in their own districts. So who will protect us from the voracious appetite and saber-rattling of the military-indusrial complex? 

  • Brendan Bossard's picture
    Brendan Bossard
    Posted: Tue, 09/12/2017 11:36 pm

    I would like to see Sen. Paul offer a solution to the problem.  If Congress cancels the Authorizations, how do we handle the withdrawals?  Iraq's proved deadly.

    As for the Military Industrial Complex:  it is a serious problem, but not an excuse to starve the military.  Address the corruption.  Do not use the lives of our military personnel as leverage in the political game.

    I find Sen. Paul's libertarian leanings and behavior distasteful in this instance.