[Tapper:] Welcome back to CNN's live coverage of the congressional hearings on both sides of the Capitol. We're going to go right now to the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, where Senator John McCain is talking about the authorization for use of force in Syria that is being discussed and drafted and marked up right now.
[Sen. John Mccain , Arizona:] It's wrong for a law to be on the books and every president of the United States say that it's not constitutional. Well, if every president of the United States, Republican or Democrat, think it's unconstitutional, well, they challenge it in court. But they haven't. And so I thank Senator Paul for his amendment.
[Sen. Rand Paul , Kentucky:] One of the one of the things that I think's misunderstood about the War Powers Act is the War Powers Act does allow the president to take action in three specific cases. One, if a war has been declared by Congress, two, if there's been statutory approval under use of authorization of force, and the third is imminent attack. It doesn't give unlimited power to the president to authorize military force. We can debate whether it's constitutional or not, but under the War Powers Act, those are the only three ways you can go. The press and the media and everybody misinterprets the War Powers Act to be 60 days and he has to report. It's true but that's not the beginning of the War Powers Act. That is one part of the War Powers Act. The initial part says the president can only go to war, imminent danger, declaration of war or statutorily approved force.
[Mccain:] Could I just say to my friend here Could I just say to my friend in response, that third provision is what is not clear, a statutory act. We're about to enact a statutory act in the view of many of us. So it I don't think it's quite as clear as Senator Paul
[Unidentified Male:] Senator Durbin and we're going to go back and forth now.
[Sen. Dick Durbin , Illinois:] Mr. Chairman, this is an important proposal by the senator from Kentucky, even though it is sense in the Senate, we should take it seriously because probably the most awesome responsibility that we have as members of Congress under the Constitution. But I'd like to suggest to him that we take care in the language we use and that we use the exact language of the War Powers Resolution, as opposed to the new language, which you have added here, because I think it will create some ambiguity if we put in a new standard in terms of the president's power. Let me be specific. At the end of your amendment you say that does not involve and then you use the words "stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation." The War Powers Act says "a national emergency created by an attack on the United States, its territories or possessions or its armed forces." So if you would consider that as a friendly amendment to use the exact language of the War Powers Resolution, which you referred to indirectly here, I think that we would be on more solid ground.
[Paul:] Yes, I'd be very happy to if the chairman would allow that amendment to the to the amendment.
[Tapper:] Are you going to tell me what to do?
[Sen. James Risch , Idaho:] Mr. Chairman.
[Unidentified Male:] Senator Risch.
[Risch:] Mr. Chairman, I first of all the Senator McCain
[Tapper:] I want to bring in Dana Bash, our chief congressional correspondent on Capitol Hill, to walk us through what's going on right now with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee exactly. Dana, they are drafting legislation. Different senators are offering amendments. What are they discussing right now?
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Congressional Correspondent:] Well, you know, when the president made his surprising speech in the Rose Garden, he talked about this being the oldest constitutional democracy. That is what you're watching. It is really democracy at work. Maybe you can even call it sausage making. But this is what they're going through. They are going through amendments that members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee have to the authorization of legislation. The first one is one by Senator Rand Paul. It has to do with the War Powers Resolution. Interesting that he's even putting up an amendment because he told us earlier he's not going to vote for this no matter what, but he wants to make a policy point and a political point as well. What we are going to look for I think the most important thing we're going to look for is the amendment that John McCain is going to put forward. He has said that he wants to change this to make clear in legislative language to codify what the president told him in the Oval Office, which is that it is the policy of the United States to make clear that they want to push back Assad's power on the battlefield. So that's what we're going to look for from, again, from McCain to vote for this, that he's a key player here, he's going to need that. It sounds like, in talking to other senators on the committee, that's likely to happen. So we're going to watch this process go forward. We do expect there to be a final vote in this committee by the end of the day. It could change, but that's the expectation now and that would be the first major legislative move before this gets to the United States Senate, the floor of the Senate, which will be next week. Jake.
[Tapper:] All right, Dana Bash at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. When we come back, we'll go back to the hearing at the House Foreign Affairs Committee, where Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel are testifying. Back right after this.