Democratic Sr Senator; previously Representative (OH-13)
Keep nuke deal with Iran, but use remaining sanctions
Q: Iran: Withdraw from treaty limiting Iran's nuclear capability & lifting some sanctions?
Sherrod Brown (D): No. Use remaining sanctions instead of unraveling agreement.
Jim Renacci (R): Yes. Called Iran #1 state sponsor of terrorism.
Source: 2018 CampusElect.org Issue Guide on Ohio Senate race
, Oct 9, 2018
Pull soldiers out of Iraq and Afghanistan and end wars
Sen. Sherrod Brown 100 percent supports President Barack Obama's decision to pull soldiers from Iraq and end a war campaign that began a decade ago. He would also welcome a similar resolution in Afghanistan.
Brown offered his opinions on war, politics and aiding veterans in an exclusive interview with the Register. Brown said, "A lot of politicians vote to fund wars, but they're not willing to support veterans."
Source: Sandusky Register on 2018 Ohio Senate race
, Jan 1, 2017
Instruct the military to come up with a withdrawal plan
Q: You're opposed to the war, but what specifically do you do now? A: We pressure. We force. We push the Iraqis to build the security forces, the military and the police security forces that they need to build. DeWine and
Bush are just saying "status quo, just stay the course." They're not advocating any real change. They've been saying for three years that things were doing well. They clearly haven't really made any real changes in what we're doing in Iraq.
Once we push them in a serious way, we push them and pressure them to compromise-the Iraqis, the Sunnis and the Shiites-and we say to the military, we instruct the military that we want to exit
Iraq within a year and a half to two years, specifically at what speed, and that the troops exit Iraq in the most orderly and safe way for Americans.
Iraq has distracted the War on Terror and made us less safe
The fundamental difference on the war on terror since 9/11 is the US has lost its focus. Look what's happened in Afghanistan. The Taliban is stronger than it's been at any time in five years. We know that more poppies are grown to 95% of the poppies
in the world are grown in Afghanistan. We're not supporting a moderate democratic government as well as we should in Afghanistan. Then it's not just in Afghanistan that we've lost our focus, that's caused al-Qaeda to be stronger.
Go look at what we've done in the US. We've failed to protect our nuclear facilities, our water systems, and our chemical plants. We tell our grandmothers to take their shoes off at the airport, yet we inspect fewer than 10% of cargo containers that
come into our ports, that come across I-70 in the heart of Ohio, that come across the turnpike in I-90. The intelligence operation in this country coupled with the loss of focus because of the war in Iraq has made the US less safe.
Voted against $87 billion that went to Halliburton
Q: Why did vote against $87 billion to fund the war in 2003? A: Because there was a better way to do it. Much of that $87 billion went to Halliburton and Bechtel and Parsons, and there was no accountability. It was a blank check. I wanted the money to go
to the troops for body armor. I spoke out on body armor over and over, questioned people like administrator Paul Bremer. DeWine should be ashamed of himself for running ads on television saying that I voted against the $87 billion.
Source: 2006 Ohio Senate Debate on NBC Meet the Press
, Oct 1, 2006
Safe, orderly troop withdrawal from Iraq by Oct. 2006
Q: Should the US still have troops in Iraq?
A: We can't pull out tomorrow. I voted against the Iraq war initially, I voted against the $87 billion at the beginning of the war to fund the war, I spoke out against the war consistently. I have a
resolution right now that requires the President to submit to the American public and to Congress an exit strategy at the end of this year, and next year beginning the troop withdrawal - a safe, orderly troop withdrawal - by October, 2006.
People understand now 1) how the President didn't tell the truth about Iraq and 2) how badly the war has been conducted, and 3) that fighting terrorism is mostly about homeland security and fighting al-Qaeda around the world.
Too many American kids have died. Dick Cheney has lied too many times to the American people.
Condemns anti-Muslim bigotry in name of anti-terrorism.
Brown co-sponsored the Resolution on bigotry against Sikh Americans:
Title: Condemning bigotry and violence against Sikh Americans in the wake of terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001.
Summary: Declares that, in the quest to identify, locate, and bring to justice the perpetrators and sponsors of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, the civil rights and liberties of all Americans, including Sikh-Americans, should be protected.
Condemns bigotry and acts of violence or discrimination against any Americans, including Sikh-Americans.
Calls upon local and Federal law enforcement authorities to: (1) work to prevent hate crimes against all Americans; and (2) prosecute to the fullest extent of the law all those who commit hate crimes.
Source: House Resolution Sponsorship 01-HR255 on Oct 4, 2001
Deploy UN multinational peacekeeping force in Darfur.
Brown co-sponsored deploying UN multinational peacekeeping force in Darfur
Calling for the urgent deployment of a robust and effective multinational peacekeeping mission with sufficient size, resources, leadership, and mandate to protect civilians in Darfur.
Whereas hundreds of thousands of people have died and approximately 2,500,000 people have been displaced in Darfur, Sudan since 2003;
Whereas Congress declared on July 22, 2004 that the atrocities in Darfur were genocide;
Whereas the Sudanese President refused to allow the UN to deploy a peacekeeping force to Darfur;
Whereas deliberately targeting civilians and people providing humanitarian assistance during an armed conflict is a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law, and those who commit such violations must be held accountable;
Whereas on June 11, 2007, Sudanese President al-Bashir pledged to accept unconditionally the full United Nations-African Union hybrid deployment;
Whereas to establish conditions of peace and security, the peacekeeping mission
must be accompanied by a peace-building process among the parties to the conflict;
Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate urges the President of the US to work with members of the UN Security Council and the African Union to ensure the expeditious deployment of the United Nations-African Union hybrid peacekeeping force with a mandate affirming that civilian protection is a primary mission objective;
Provide the UN-African Union hybrid force with sufficient logistical support and airlift capacity; and necessary vehicles, fixed-wing aircraft, and helicopters for tactical reconnaissance and armed deterrence;
Be prepared to implement meaningful measures, including the imposition of multilateral sanctions, an arms embargo, and a no-fly zone for Sudanese military flights over Darfur, if the Government of Sudan obstructs deployment of the agreed upon peacekeeping mission.
Legislative Outcome: Agreed to by Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Source: Resolution on Darfur (S.RES 276) 07-SR276 on Jul 19, 2007
Iranian nuclear weapons: prevention instead of containment.
Brown co-sponsored Resolution on Iran's nuclear program
Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the nuclear program of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Whereas, since at least the late 1980s, Iran has engaged in a sustained pattern of illicit and deceptive activities to acquire nuclear capability;
Whereas the UN Security Council has adopted multiple resolutions since 2006 demanding the full suspension of all uranium enrichment-related activities by Iran, particularly possible military dimensions;
Whereas, in Nov. 2011, the IAEA issued an extensive report that documents `serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran`s nuclear programme`;
Whereas top leaders of Iran have repeatedly threatened the existence of the State of Israel;
Whereas the Department of State has designated Iran as a state sponsor of terrorism since 1984;
Whereas Iran has provided weapons, training, & funding to terrorist groups, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and Shiite militias in Iraq;
Whereas Iran had forged a `secret deal` with al Qaeda to facilitate the movement of al Qaeda fighters and funding through Iranian territory;
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives, that Congress--
Reaffirms that the US Government has a vital interest in working together to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability;
warns that time is limited to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability;
urges continued and increasing economic and diplomatic pressure on Iran until a full and sustained suspension of all uranium enrichment-related activities;
expresses that the window for diplomacy is closing;
expresses support for the universal rights and democratic aspirations of the people of Iran;
strongly supports US policy to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability;
rejects any US policy that would rely on containment as an option in response to the Iranian nuclear threat.
Require Congress' approval before military action in Iran.
Brown co-sponsored requiring Congress' approval before military action in Iran
RESOLUTION Affirming that any offensive military action taken against Iran must be explicitly approved by Congress.
WHEREAS article I, section 8, of the Constitution of the United States vests in Congress all power to declare war:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That any offensive military action taken by the United States against Iran must be explicitly approved by Congress before such action may be initiated.
Sen. DURBIN. `We are now more than halfway through our fifth year in this war in Iraq. We find ourselves stuck as an occupier in a Middle East civil war. Thousands of our sons & daughters have been killed or injured. The total financial cost may be well over $1 trillion--money, I might add, that this administration has borrowed against our children`s future.
`America`s reputation internationally has been severely damaged and critical military, diplomatic, and intelligence resources have been diverted from the war in Afghanistan--a war
I supported, and a country this administration has increasingly neglected. And now, after so many errors, so many lives, and so much damage, this administration is again raising the prospect of yet another war in the Middle East--this time a war with Iran.
`I fear this administration has learned nothing from the colossal error, colossal misjudgment in the invasion of Iraq. Let me be clear: I am gravely concerned about Iran`s activities in the region and its nuclear agenda. But any offensive action against Iran must be approved by Congress.
`Recent statements by this administration give me concern that this administration is considering just this--an offensive military action against Iran without the consent of Congress. Both Pres. Bush and Vice Pres. Cheney have made public remarks about Iran that suggest an administration readying for military aggression. We know Cheney`s historic views on fundamental checks and balances in our constitution. They are disturbing.`
Source: Resolution on Iran (S.RES.356) 2007-SR356 on Oct 25, 2007
Sanctions on Iran to end nuclear program.
Brown signed Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act
Expresses the sense of Congress that:
diplomatic efforts to address Iran`s illicit nuclear efforts, unconventional and ballistic missile development programs, and support for international terrorism are more likely to be effective if the President is empowered with explicit authority to impose additional sanctions on the government of Iran;
US concerns regarding Iran are strictly the result of that government`s actions; and
the people of the United States have feelings of friendship for the people of Iran and regret that developments in recent decades have created impediments to that friendship.
States that it should be US policy to:
support international diplomatic efforts to end Iran`s uranium enrichment program and its nuclear weapons program;
encourage foreign governments to direct state-owned and private entities to cease all investment in, and support of, Iran`s energy sector and all exports of refined petroleum products to Iran;
on the Central Bank of Iran and any other Iranian financial institution engaged in proliferation activities or support of terrorist groups; and
work with allies to protect the international financial system from deceptive and illicit practices by Iranian financial institutions involved in proliferation activities or support of terrorist groups.
Amends the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 to direct the President to impose sanctions if a person has made an investment of $20 million or more (or any combination of investments of at least $5 million which in the aggregate equals or exceeds $20 million in any 12-month period) that directly and significantly contributed to Iran`s ability to develop its petroleum resources. (Under current law the sanction thresholds are $40 million, $10 million, and $40 million, respectively.)
No military force against Iran without Congress approval.
Brown voted YEA the Iran War Powers Resolution
Axios.com summary: The House passed a symbolic war powers resolution directing President Trump to halt the use of military force against Iran unless he obtains approval from Congress.
The big picture: A classified briefing on the killing of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani [by the US military] left Democrats and even some Republicans deeply skeptical, with many claiming that officials did not provide evidence that there was an `imminent` threat from Iran. Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rand Paul (R-KY) said they will vote in favor of a similar resolution in the Senate [S J Res 68].
What opponents are saying: Former national security adviser and notorious Iran hawk John Bolton tweeted: `The 1973 War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional. It reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of how the Constitution allocated foreign affairs authority between the President and Congress. The Resolution should be repealed.` Pres. Trump quote tweeted
Bolton and added: `Smart analysis, I fully agree!`
What supporters are saying: Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) was one of the few Republicans to vote in favor of the resolution, stating on the House floor: `Killing Soleimani was the right decision, but engaging in another forever war in the Middle East would be the wrong decision.` Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced legislation that would block funding for offensive military force against Iran without congressional authorization. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) is also seeking to repeal the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which has been used repeatedly to justify war in the Middle East in the wake of 9/11. Lee was the only member of Congress to vote against the AUMF in 2001, criticizing it as a `blank check.`
Legislative outcome: H Con Res 83 Passed House 224-194-13 on 1/9/20; S J Res 68 passed Senate 55-45-0 on 2/13/20. Vetoed 5/6; Senate veto override failed 5/7/20.
Source: Congressional vote 20-SCR33 on Jan 9, 2020
Sponsored bill to oppose Israeli annexation of West Bank.
Brown co-sponsored Resolution on Israeli Annexation
Congressional summary: A resolution affirming the United States commitment to the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and noting that Israeli annexation of territory in the West Bank would undermine peace,, harm Israel`s relationship with its Arab neighbors, threaten Israel`s Jewish and democratic identity, and undermine Israel`s security.
Aljazeera summary, 4/22/20: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that it was Israel`s decision whether to annex parts of the occupied West Bank, and the US will offer its views on this to the new Israeli government in private. `As for the annexation of the West Bank, the Israelis will ultimately make those decisions,` Pompeo told reporters. Israel`s intention--in accordance with President Trump`s Middle East plan--to annex the Jordan Valley and illegal Jewish settlements would defy international law. Last year, the Trump administration said it would no longer abide by a 1978 State Department legal
opinion that the settlements were `inconsistent with international law`.
Letter to Secretary Pompeo from 13 members of Congress on 6/30/20: We express our deep concern over the planned annexation of occupied Palestinian territory by the government of Israel. Annexing parts of the West Bank will perpetuate and entrench human rights violations against the Palestinian people, including limitations on freedom of movement and mass expropriation of privately-owned Palestinian land. Furthermore, Israel has stated it will not grant citizenship to Palestinians living in annexed territory or to the many more Palestinians living in the isolated enclaves that Israel will opt not to annex, paving the path toward an apartheid system. Already existing Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, amount to a war crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Sponsored resolution to repeal 2002 AUMF against Iraq.
Brown co-sponsored AUMF Repeal Act
Whereas the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 1991 and 2002 currently remain valid law;
Whereas, since 2014, U.S. military forces have operated in Iraq at the request of the Government of Iraq for the sole purpose of supporting its efforts to combat ISIS;
Whereas authorizations for the use of military force that are no longer necessary should have a clear political and legal ending:
Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States [that]
The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq is hereby repealed.
Politico.com in OPPOSITION, 3/25/21: Republicans who opposed repealing the 2002 authorization said that it should be replaced because Iraq is still home to terror groups that threaten the United States. Rep. Michael McCaul called for consultations with first in order to craft a replacement. `Real
AUMF reform requires Congress and the administration working together on actual text to replace the aging 2001 and 2002 AUMFs to provide authorities needed to keep the American people, and, most importantly, our deployed troops, safe from terrorists,` McCaul said.
Heritage Foundation in SUPPORT (1/6/20): There has been an open and vibrant debate about whether the 2001 AUMF covers ISIS, a terrorist organization that did not even exist when the 2001 statute was passed and has disavowed and formally broken away from al-Qaeda, the group that is covered by the 2001 AUMF. Yet both the Obama and Trump Administrations claim that the 2001 AUMF covers ISIS and associated forces. Congress has shied away from the much-needed debate about whether the 2002 Iraq AUMF is no longer necessary.
Legislative Outcome: Passed House 268-161-2 on H.R.256 on 6/17/2021 (rollcall 172; no vote on S.J.R.10 nor H.R.3261 in 2021)