National security: Banks said he wants to give service members the ability to defend the country from outside threats, but in a financially responsible way.
Banks' website also states that the U.S. has a "moral obligation to protect Israel."
Source: Indianapolis Star on 2024 Indiana Senate race
, Sep 17, 2024
Fight radical Islamic terrorism abroad to avoid another 9/11
Q: NATIONAL SECURITY: The best way to maintain peace is through a strong military?
A: Strongly Agree
Q: What should the United States do to help eradicate the threat of radical Islamic terrorism?
A:
We should fight radical Islamic terrorism abroad rather than allow another 9/11 to occur on US soil.
Q: I support BDS (boycott, divestment, and sanction) against Israel if they refuse to allow the creation of a Palestinian state?
A: Strongly Disagree
Source: AFA iVoterGuide on 2020 IN-3 House race
, Nov 3, 2020
Military sanctions against Iran
One clear lesson Jim Banks learned from his time in Afghanistan is the importance of reliable allies. Elect Jim Banks to Congress and he will:
Support economic and military sanctions against Iran until they demonstrate their willingness to
terminate their nuclear weapons program.
Demand there must be some resolution with neighboring states regarding their intentions toward Israel before ratifying any long-term agreements regarding the Middle East.
Defend Americans subject to
hostility overseas by violent non-state actors like ISIS.
Stop funding to the United Nations that promote radical ideology and unjustly blames Israel for domestic political strife.
Nation-states like Iran who use military might to influence their
neighbors must be subject to swift, strong reaction from the US and the international community. As a state senator, Jim co-authored sanctions against Iran in response to their beligerant behavior. Iran's record on human rights is beyond reprehensible.
Banks voted NAY Remove US Forces from Hostilities Against Yemen
Congressional Summary: H.J.Res.37 directs the President to remove U.S. Armed Forces from hostilities in or affecting Yemen within 30 days unless Congress authorizes a later withdrawal date, issues a declaration of war, or specifically authorizes the use of the Armed Forces. Prohibited activities include providing in-flight fueling for non-U.S. aircraft conducting missions as part of the conflict in Yemen.
Statement in opposition by Rep. Phil Roe (R-TN-1): This legislation would hamper the ability of our military commanders to limit terrorist activity in Yemen, and would create a vacuum for Iran to fill. I believe that the withdrawal of our forces from the region should be done in a way that ensures long term security and stability
Statement in support by Rep. Adam David Smith (D-WA-9): The civil war in Yemen has led to the world`s worst humanitarian crisis with over half of the population facing severe food insecurity and 24 million
Yemenis in need of humanitarian assistance. Passage of this resolution in the House sends a clear message to this Administration that Congress does not support de facto support for the Saudi-led coalition in this conflict. The US should be focused on working towards a peaceful resolution to this conflict and taking measures to alleviate the devastating humanitarian situation.`
Statement in opposition by Rep. George Holding (R-NC-02): As part of their expansive campaign to destabilize the region, Iran is providing extensive support and aid to the Houthi rebel forces responsible for precipitating this conflict in the first place. Thankfully, Saudi Arabia has stepped up and taken a key leadership role in combating the Iranian-backed rebels. We should be supporting their efforts.
Legislative outcome: House Bill Passed 248-177-6 on rollcall #577. No action in Senate [died in Committee].
Source: Congressional vote 19-HJR37 on Jan 30, 2019
2002 AUMF against Iraq should apply to ISIS.
Banks voted NAY AUMF Repeal Act
Resolution excerpts:
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)
Source: Congressional vote 21-SJR10 on Jun 17, 2021