The following column was submitted by U.S. Rep. Jim Banks, a Republican who represents Indiana's 3rd District.

In the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Congress authorized the use of military force against the entities that carried out the plan. In the decade and a half since, both the threats our country faces and the conflicts we are engaged in have evolved in ways we never envisioned 15 years ago.
The authorizations for the use of military force that were signed into law in 2001 and 2002 may have been appropriate at the time, but the authority they granted to our commander-in-chief was unprecedented. The authorizations empowered the president to target non-state actors and did not specify which states and non-state actors were included.
Unfortunately, these broad authorizations have now been contorted to apply to a variety of threats around the globe. Throughout his eight years in office, President Barack Obama frequently used the 2001 and 2002 authorizations to engage in global conflicts not envisioned by Congress, without congressional input.
Today, President Donald Trump rightly is weighing more involvement against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, a global threat that did not even exist when the last authorization was signed. While I support his desire to fast-track plans for defeating ISIS, I believe it is necessary to re-evaluate the authorizations in place to conduct such military operations. Without that evaluation, we will swiftly approach a constitutional crisis in which unchecked executive authority is permitted to wage wars beyond what was authorized by Congress.
To give Congress a voice in this important debate, I recently introduced a resolution in the House that will authorize the use of military force against ISIS, al-Qaida and the Taliban and require the administration to provide to Congress a plan to defeat ISIS. My legislation is identical to a Senate bill recently authored by Senator Todd Young, R-Indiana.
The significance of the conflict in Syria and its devastating humanitarian impact, combined with the ongoing war against ISIS, are deserving of a sober assessment and robust debate by the representatives the American people elected.
Further, as the armed services committees in Congress begin their annual work of authorizing funding for our military, it is essential that we first consider what we are asking our armed forces to do.
Passing a new authorization to explicitly authorize war against ISIS and define the American military’s mission in the Mideast is also a way for Congress to express its full support of those serving overseas to keep our country safe. I want the men and women serving in uniform to be the best-equipped, best-trained and most lethal force on the planet, and I want them to know that the legislative branch is standing with them.
To accomplish this, Congress must ensure that our armed forces are resourced appropriately to achieve defined goals. My legislation aims to provide our military with the goal posts necessary to frame their objectives and shape their requirements.
Now is the time for Congress once again to assume the mantle of leadership by fully debating and passing a new authorization for military force. The scourge of ISIS must be defeated, and if Congress gives my legislation the attention that it is due and supports it with appropriate funding, I believe a lasting military victory will follow.