THE TOPLINE: Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is introducing a measure to formally declare war on the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and provide a limited authorization to use force against the terrorist group.
“I believe the President must come to Congress to begin a war and that Congress has a duty to act. Right now, this war is illegal until Congress acts pursuant to the Constitution and authorizes it,“ Paul said in a statement.
The bill would give President Obama authorization to use the armed forces against ISIS, but restricts the deployment of ground troops. Paul’s proposal would only allow the use of ground forces to rescue servicemembers, conduct operations against high-value targets or assist with “advisory and intelligence gathering operations.”
Those limitations could face resistance from other Republicans who say they won’t back any authorization that limits the president’s military options.
California Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff, however, applauded the measure.
“Senator Paul’s introduction of a war resolution today is a welcome addition to the growing ranks of bipartisan members calling for a debate and vote over a new authorization to use force and a repeal of the existing ones,” said Schiff.
WH: OBAMA HAS AUTHORITY ‘HE NEEDS’: The White House didn’t weigh in on Paul’s measure, but said the senator was wrong to suggest current military action against ISIS is unconstitutional.
“We have been very clear that the president has all of the authority that he needs because it’s already been given to him by Congress,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said.
The White House is relying on the authorization for use of military force that gave the president power to pursue terrorists after the Sept. 11 attacks.
The president, though, has said he would welcome a new authorization, tailored to the fight against ISIS.So far, Obama has deployed 1,400 military advisers to Iraq since June and wants to send another 1,500. The U.S. and coalition allies are also conducting airstrikes since August against ISIS targets in both Iraq and Syria.
KAINE: DELAY ‘DISRESPECTFUL’: Some lawmakers have pressed for a vote on authorizing force during the lame duck, but House GOP leaders say that should be left to the incoming Congress.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) blasted Congress Wednesday for not passing an authorization before the end of the year, calling it “disrespectful” to the troops risking their lives.
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) echoed those remarks on the Senate floor.
“We’re suppose to debate, discuss and have the people discuss before this country is committed to war,” King said. “For us to go home, to take a recess, to say we don’t really want to talk about this is unfair to the American people.”
LAWMAKERS LOOK TO BLOCK SYRIAN REBEL PROGRAM: Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) plans to introduce two amendments on Wednesday to the 2015 defense policy bill that would strip provisions authorizing training and equipment for Syrian rebels to fight ISIS and ban ground troops in Iraq and Syria.
He will introduce the amendments, which have bipartisan support, at a House Rules Committee hearing, in hopes they receive a floor vote along with the defense bill.
“We believe we owe it to our troops and to the country to have a debate and a separate vote on these major policy decisions,” Van Hollen said in an interview with The Hill. “They should not be tucked into a huge defense authorization bill that doesn’t allow for any amendment.”
DEFENSE BILL HITS CAPITOL HILL: Months of talks between the House and Senate Armed Services panels on a defense policy bill finally yielded results as lawmakers unveiled a $585 billion compromise measure.
The proposed bill authorizes $521.3 billion in base discretionary spending for national defense, and $63.7 billion for the Overseas Contingency Operations fund (OCO).
One of the biggest compromises in the bill is language allowing the Air Force to reduce the flying time for 36 of its A-10 “Warthog” attack planes. The service had originally proposed mothballing the entire fleet, but lawmakers rejected that idea.
Still, supporters of the aircraft were less than thrilled with the outcome.
“I was disappointed that this was in the final package,” said Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.).
She said “there was a very clear message from both the House and the Senate” in support of the Warthog.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), another A-10 defender, said he can “live with” the proposed deal but that the issue would return next year.
“To those who think this A-10 fight is over, you got another thing coming,” he said. “The Air Force better be ready and able to answer some hard questions next year.”
Retiring Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) said he was “satisfied” with the A-10 provision, labeling it a “fair approach.”
GITMO RESTRICTIONS DROPPED: The massive compromise defense policy likely left few completely satisfied.
Levin himself said he was “disappointed” a provision that could have accelerated the closure of the Guantánamo Bay detention facility was dropped.
The Senate’s version included language allowing the Defense secretary to move detainees from the facility to the U.S.
“We pushed hard to get the Senate provision adopted,” Levin said.
Instead, the compromise bill keeps in place a number of restrictions, including bans on transferring detainees to the U.S. and on constructing new detention facilities on American soil.
Levin chastised that approach, labeling it the “status quo.” He said the “only practical option open” to the president is to continue sending detainees to third-party nations.
DEFENSE BILL ‘LAND GRAB’?: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) asked his colleagues to reject the annual defense bill because of what he called an “extreme land grab” in its language.
The measure features an assortment of public land and energy provisions, including designating new national parks and wilderness areas and speeding the permitting process for oil and gas drilling.
Cruz called the provisions “an extreme land grab to the NDAA [that] is a disservice to members of the Armed Forces.”
“With the military’s shrinking budget, it is offensive that this bill would be used to fund congressional pork,” said Cruz, a potential 2016 presidential contender.
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the Armed Services Committee’s top Republican, said he agreed with GOP lawmakers who oppose the land provisions but defended them as necessary to passing the defense measure.
“It’s outrageous,” he said. “I dislike it just as much as anybody else. But you have to have a bill. That’s what people lose sight of.”
BENGHAZI PANEL TO MEET: The House Select Committee investigating the 2012 Benghazi attacks announced Wednesday that it will meet again before the year is out.
The hearing on Dec. 10 will feature two State Department officials and serve as a follow-up to the panel’s inaugural September meeting on security measures surrounding American diplomats overseas.
The lame-duck meeting’s tone could be less restrained than the House panel’s first hearing, when Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) stressed the neutral, fact-finding nature of the committee’s mission.
Committee Republicans could look to use the hearing to chastise Hillary Clinton, who was secretary of State at the time of the deadly strike in Libya. Republicans have repeatedly attacked Clinton’s handling of the episode, seeking to make it a key issue for the possible 2016 candidate.
Testifying at the hearing will be Greg Starr, the assistant secretary for diplomatic security, who testified in September, along with Steve Linick, the State Department’s inspector general.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
— GOP senators blast Obama’s release of Gitmo prisoners
— WH: No cooperation with Iran against ISIS
— Doctors Without Borders: Military must do more against Ebola outbreak
— CIA ‘torture report’ could be out Monday
— Corker: Expect Senate to play ‘robust role’ on Iran
Please send tips and comments to Kristina Wong, kwong@digital-stage.thehill.com, and Martin Matishak, mmatishak@digital-stage.thehill.com.
Follow us on Twitter: @thehill, @kristina_wong, @martinmatishak