House Iran War Powers Resolution Could Lose Support to Competing Bill by Pro-Israel Democrat

The U.S. Senate declined an opportunity to rein in President Donald Trump’s unauthorized war on Iran in a vote Wednesday as the conflict’s toll mounted.

Nearly all Republicans were joined by Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., in blocking a resolution that would have forced Trump to seek congressional approval for further strikes.

Advocates of the measure and a companion in the House, known as war powers resolutions, acknowledged they were uphill battles given the near-unanimous support for the war among the Republicans who control Congress. They said the votes were still important as a test for lawmakers given Trump’s opposition to seeking congressional approval for the joint Israeli–American war on Iran.

The House of Representatives is set to vote on another measure Thursday that also faces long odds, in part because a small group of pro-Israel Democrats have introduced competing legislation.

The companion resolution to the Senate’s was sponsored by Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky. Besides Massie, however, only one other Republican has been identified as a potential yes vote for the resolution.

Several Democrats seem set oppose the resolution despite party leadership’s decision to whip votes on it.

One is Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., a staunch supporter of Israel who has offered a resolution of his own that would allow Trump 30 days to continue attacks. Gottheimer said in a statement that his measure would allow Trump to avoid a “potentially precarious withdrawal.”

An advocate backing the Khanna–Massie resolution noted that the 30-day time frame lines up with how long Trump has suggested the conflict might last.

“There is already a vote this week on Khanna–Massie. Any representative that is actually against the war, that’s the vehicle they should be voting for now, and not attempting to give Trump a blank check for 30 days,” Cavan Kharrazian, a senior policy adviser at the progressive group Demand Progress, said Tuesday. “We have already seen in the past four days the death and destruction and escalation with this war. I can’t even imagine what things look like in 30 days.”

Senate Shutout

The war powers resolution in the Senate was the latest attempt to check Trump’s growing appetite for foreign conflict. Relying on the War Powers Act of 1973, the resolution would have forced Trump to seek congressional approval to continue strikes.

As with previous resolutions focused on boat strikes in the Caribbean and Trump’s war on Venezuela, however, it fell short of obtaining the simple majority it needed despite support from Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.

Fetterman defected from the rest of the Democratic caucus to oppose the measure; he was also the only Democrat to vote against a war powers resolution to block Trump’s attacks on boats in the Caribbean and one to impose restrictions after last summer’s attacks on Iran.

Paul was the only Republican senator to vote for Wednesday’s war powers bill. Republicans who have expressed skepticism of foreign intervention in the past seemed to learn a lesson from January, when Trump lashed out against GOP senators who defected from the administration on a Venezuela war powers resolution.

Much of the debate on the Senate floor Wednesday centered on whether the conflict will be over relatively soon, as Trump has sometimes suggested. Democrats raised the specter of the conflict spiraling out for years, in the mold of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

“The only way that you will be able to destroy their capacity to make missiles and drones is to be permanently running jets overhead and constantly bombing the new sites that the hard-line regime sets up. That’s endless war. That’s trillions of dollars,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn.

Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., pushed back against that argument in his floor remarks.

“It’s not an aimless exercise in the Middle East. This is a measured campaign to eliminate the ayatollah’s threat. It may take time to finish. We’re not going to put a time limit on it. That does not make it endless,” he said.

In a show of force meant to convey the gravity of the moment, Democrats packed the chamber during the vote count, while members of the Republican caucus trickled in and left.

“Not at War Right Now”

Even as Wicker sought to downplay the prospect of an endless conflict, Trump and top administration officials were sending mixed messages. Trump has ruled out the idea of seeking congressional approval despite the potential for a long war.

That did not bother House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who said at a press conference Wednesday that the conflict does not meet the definition of a war that would trigger the Constitution’s requirement for congressional approval.

“We’re not at war right now. We’re four days into a very specific, clear mission, Operation Epic Fury,” he said.

Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., noted that officials up to Trump himself have used the word “war.”

“And yet he refused to come before Congress as the Constitution demands and make his case for war. And after yesterday’s briefing, I think I know why,” Warnock said, referring to a Tuesday briefing from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and others. “It is exceedingly difficult to explain your rationale when it is not clear in your own head — when it changes every day.”