The Obama Administration is trying to get an agreement with the government of Afghanistan that would keep thousands of U.S. troops there after 2014, constantly exposed to mortal danger. No U.S. commitment to keep thousands of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan beyond 2014 should be allowed without prior Congressional debate and authorization, consistent with the Congressional role in making decisions about war envisioned by the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution. Congress didn’t allow the Administration to bomb Syria without Congressional authorization; Congress shouldn’t allow the Administration to keep thousands of U.S. troops in Afghanistan without Congressional authorization. Urge President Obama to go to Congress for explicit approval before making any commitment to keep thousands of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, and urge Congress to insist on a Congressional debate and vote before any such commitment takes place.

Earlier this year, it looked as if we were on a collision course with Iran over its nuclear ambitions, but with the recent elections a few months ago, and a new president (Rouhani) and negotiating team expressing willingness to reach out to the U.S., we have what may be a rare opportunity to pursue diplomacy, possibly even improve relations and remove the threat of war. Just as this opportunity arises, many members of Congress (both Democrats and Republicans), being somewhat secretly and unduly influenced by AIPAC and paranoid Israeli warmongers, also Saudi Arabia, are attempting to torpedo the negotiations while they are barely getting started, passing bills calling for more crippling sanctions, and even calling for the use of military force (see bills by Sen. Lindsey Graham and Rep. Trent Franks). Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and members of Congress echoing him make statements that Rouhani is lying, trying to con us with a charm offensive, when they have no evidence to back up their claims; in fact, numerous reports from U.S. top military officials show that Iran has not yet even made a decision to weaponize or enrich uranium above 20%. Most of mainstream media goes in lockstep with Israeli warmongers and their friends in Congress who sell out to them, and reports overly alarmist propaganda, or outright lies and distortions about Iran's nuke program. It is time for this madness to stop. Congress needs to be asked the tough questions about the potential Iran conflict they are attempting to instigate and come clean with the American public about the sacrifices that will be necessary if we do go to war. Prepare for a massive disruption in oil supplies worse than the 1973 OPEC oil embargo, and our economy being in much worse shape than it was even at its lowest point in 2008; be ready for mass casualties worse than Iraq and Afghanistan combined, and given how our military is stretched thin with the two conflicts we are winding down right now, and actually stopping the Iranian nuclear program by force would require a massive ground war and occupation of the country, I don't see how we can pull this off without reinstituting the military draft. So to members of Congress, if you won't give diplomacy a chance, I hope you will at least have the guts to tell the American people honestly what to expect and prepare for, before we get into this conflict, and allow us to give our input as to whether this is really worth it, especially since, for many of us, our lives or our children's lives may be on the line.

The Administration has claimed that its drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen are legal under U.S. law, but it has never shared with Congress or the American people all of its legal memos purportedly giving legal justification for the policy. The Administration has also not told Congress or the American people who we are at war with - which groups the Administration claims it has the authority to target with drone strikes under U.S. law. By introducing legislation to compel the Administration to share this information with Congress and the public, Senator Paul will give Americans concerned about the drone strike policy a way to engage Members of Congress on the issue.

For three years, a group of some 600 multinational corporations and trade associations have been quietly negotiating a trade pact IN SECRET that could void American laws that protect workers, jobs, health, and the environment. During negotiations here last summer, news leaked of some of the provisions U.S. trade officials were prepared to approve, and a public outcry derailed the talks. Trade Representative Ron Kirk resigned. Now that Michael Froman has been confirmed as the new U.S. Trade Representative he is pushing to renew "fast track" authority so President Obama can sign the agreement first, and then force a quick vote in Congress without any public scrutiny, floor debate, or revisions. Rep. Keith Ellison has called TPP "the largest corporate power grab you've never heard of." Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, is one of just four U.S. Senators who voted against Froman's confirmation this summer. She said of TPP, “I have heard the argument that transparency would undermine the Trade Representative’s policy to complete the trade agreement because public opposition would be significant.” Warren explained, “In other words, if people knew what was going on, they would stop it. This argument is exactly backwards. If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States.” The only TPP language made public was leaked in 2012 and shared by Public Citizen. Since then trade officials have kept a tight lid on the negotiations, only recently allowing members of Congress to view (not copy) the text, which remains "classified." Among the most disturbing revelations in last year's leaked TPP language, that seems to be mirrored in the Atlantic version as well: Foreign companies would have "preferred status" – granting them greater rights within our borders than our own companies enjoy. U.S. companies would have more incentives to offshore jobs, and foreign companies would not be bound by the minimum wage and could sue the U.S. if our health, safety, or environmental regulations interfered with their profits. Jurisdiction over such suits would rest not in the hands of elected officials or judges, but with an international business tribunal. Their decisions, which would be binding upon all member nations, would supersede our own laws – including our Constitution.

In October 2012, 8-year-old Nabeela ventured out with her grandmother Mamana Bibi to do daily chores in their family's large, open field. Moments later, Mamana was blasted into pieces by a US drone strike that appears to have been aimed directly at her. Amnesty International did not find any evidence she was endangering anyone, let alone posing an imminent threat to the US. Yet a year has passed and the US government has not acknowledged Mamana Bibi's death, let alone provided justice or compensation for it. We can't bring back Mamana Bibi but, through a process of accountability, we can stop the US government from committing unlawful killings with impunity.

The UN election for China to an influential Human Rights Council seat takes place on November 12th, 2013. This seat would cement China's ability to control the direction and priorities of international human rights activity. China's pervasive contempt for human rights is well-documented by UN monitors, human rights organizations, and the US State Department. Chinese prisons hold tens of thousands of dissidents persecuted for their faith, ethnicity, or political beliefs, including Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiaobo. For decades, China has impeded worldwide efforts by the United States to effectively monitor or reduce human rights abuses in UN member states. The United States cannot allow China to gain a world leadership position on human rights. By voting NO, we will be taking a stand for not just our own values, but the basic rights of millions worldwide protected by the Human Rights Council.

Fast Track is a procedural trick created by Nixon in 1974, to by-pass the Constitutional provision in Article 1-8, which states that “Congress shall have the power to regulate Commerce with foreign nations.” Fast track erases the representative power vested in Congress to debate bills on their merits, or amend, and instead, cedes this power to the president. Both so-called free trade agreements, TPP, and TTIP, undermine United States sovereignty by creating binding agreements set by some 600 trans-national corporate advisors, and would nullify many of our laws that protect citizens, consumers, and the environment, if these very laws stand in the way of projected corporate profits. Corporations are suing today in anticipation of setting precedents on cases ranging from drug patent extensions, which would eliminate affordable generics, suing over countries banning a pesticide that kills bees, to suing over product labeling of GMOs. Every area where a corporation will earn less, will be on the chopping block, among them, labor rights, and minimum wage requirements, patent and copyright issues, food safety, product safety standards, clean air and water, buy American procurement policies, healthcare, energy, internet freedoms, and service sector regulations. TPP and TTIP, sweeping Free Trade Agreements, while having been negotiated in secret for three years, will, if passed into trade law, do extreme damage to the citizens of this country. We already know from experience, the damage free trade agreements like NAFTA have caused: mass shutdowns of U.S. manufacturing, soaring unemployment, deep decreases in wages, huge budget deficits, enormous trade deficits, and increased immigration rates, among many other negative impacts. With so very much at stake for the citizens of this country, shouldn’t we openly debate the bill on its merits, and amend, instead of limiting floor debate to 20 hours and only an up or down vote? Fast Track is outdated, and there is no reason to subject the citizens of this country, and your district to such an onerous procedure that severely limits representative government, handing it instead to “foreign and corporate advisors.” Representative Castor, please vote against fast track, and in favor of government of, by, and for the people.

The Administration has claimed that its drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen are legal under U.S. law, but it has never shared with Congress or the American people all of its legal memos purportedly giving legal justification for the policy. The Administration has also not told Congress or the American people who we are at war with - which groups the Administration claims it has the authority to target with drone strikes under U.S. law. By introducing legislation to compel the Administration to share this information with Congress and the public, Senator Wyden will give Americans concerned about the drone strike policy a way to engage Members of Congress on the issue.

Iranian leaders are currently seeking relief from the lawfully imposed U.S. sanctions. Hundreds of survivors, mothers, fathers, brothers, and sisters of those killed or maimed in the Oct. 23, 1983 Marine Barracks bombing seek relief from their pain and suffering every day. 30 years is too long to wait for justice. President Obama can hold Iran accountable for their actions. Remember the peacekeepers, Mr. President. The first duty is to remember.

Started in 2008 under President Bush, the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) has excluded everyone but corporations in developing this “trade agreement” in which only 5 chapters of 29 are about trade. The other 24 detail new corporate “rights” that will lower US food safety standards, eliminate US control of natural gas exports, encourage US companies to outsource jobs, extend monopoly drug pricing and ban US government drug price negotiations for Medicaid, prohibit imposition by Congress of certain financial taxes and Wall Street reforms, turn the internet over to private interests, limit US government regulation of utilities, education, transportation, and sets up an international tribunal where corporations can sue government for jeopardizing “expected future profits.” The “agreement has no expiration date and can’t be changed without 100% participants’ agreement.

Free Trade agreements have already lost jobs, shuttered plants and hollowed out Maine's communities. The last thing we need is another trade deal that limits ability to safeguard the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat. We don't need any free trade agreements; we need fair trade agreements.

Republican extremism has impacted me in this way: I could not use the bathroom at an interstate rest stop. And it pains me to see friends not getting paid.