WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans again blocked a Democratic resolution Wednesday that would have barred President Donald Trump from taking further military action in Iran. The vote landed at 47-52, mostly along party lines, and it basically followed the same familiar script as earlier efforts to rein in Trump’s authority.
Once more, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., was the only Republican to vote for the measure, while Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., was the only Democrat or independent to vote against it. Sen. Jim Justice, R-W.Va., missed the vote. A lot of attention stayed on who crossed the aisle—because that’s where the political temperature is usually hiding.
The resolution, offered by Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., says: “Congress hereby directs the President to remove the United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Iran, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or a specific authorization for use of military force.” If that sounds like a clean line in the sand, the Senate vote didn’t quite make it one. Republicans have repeatedly rejected attempts to end the war or limit Trump’s ability to act without congressional approval.
Even so, some senators are clearly thinking ahead. Misryoum newsroom reporting points to a growing willingness to be less deferential to Trump once the war hits 60 days, which will come at the end of April. Under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, presidents must get congressional approval for military action that goes beyond 60 days. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., put it bluntly: “We’ve got to start answering questions.” He said the 60-day target is what he’s looking at.
Sen. John Curtis, R-Utah, who is usually aligned with Trump’s agenda, wrote in his local paper, the Deseret News: “I will not support ongoing military action beyond a 60-day window without congressional approval. I take this position for two reasons — one is historical, and one is constitutional.” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, has also expressed misgivings about the Iran war and floated a resolution that would give Trump limited authorization to use military force. Somewhere in there is the sense that even Republicans who voted no aren’t exactly closing the door for later.
On the other side, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer vowed to keep pressuring with new votes. Misryoum editorial desk noted that the votes are privileged and don’t require Republican leaders’ consent to reach the floor. “We will bring these resolutions to the floor every week,” Schumer told reporters on Tuesday. “Our troops deserve a mission, not a mess. They deserve a strategy, not chaos. Now, Republicans have a choice. Stand with our troops or keep them in harm’s way without a plan, stand up as a senator or rubber-stamp Trump’s disastrous and failed war policies.” It’s hard not to hear the challenge in that—especially after votes like Wednesday’s.
Public mood is part of the pressure too, though it’s not always neatly translated into votes. A recent CBS News poll found that 40% of Americans approve of the U.S. taking military action in Iran, while 60% disapprove, with widespread disapproval and distrust of Trump’s handling of the situation. And back on the domestic front, gas prices have risen since the war began. Misryoum newsroom reporting also points to costs of diesel and fertilizer driving economic concerns in the U.S., which then feeds fears of political fallout among Republicans.
In a hallway exchange that seemed almost too ordinary for a debate this fraught, Sen. Josh Hawley said he hopes an end is near and argued for an exit strategy that can bring down energy prices quickly. “I heard about it constantly while I was at home,” he said, noting that gas prices in Missouri are “a little bit cheaper” than where he was—still “very expensive.” Hawley said the 60-day window gives the president some
latitude: “We’re a few weeks off from that, but not too far.” Then again, not all Republicans are converging on the deadline. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., says Trump can act without their approval for as long as he sees fit, and he also signaled openness to a U.S. military ground presence—though he said it doesn’t need to be “massive.” “If it requires some special ops to help the Iranian people take over their government, I
wouldn’t be opposed to that,” Johnson said, adding: “Unconditional surrender, this regime has to be ended.”
So the vote itself settled nothing really—just confirmed who is resisting, for now. Whether the next phase looks different when the 60 days near is still, in a way, the real question. And in Washington, that’s often the question everyone is pretending not to ask yet.
S&P 500 reaches new high as Iran war drags on
Greenland PM: Citizens “don’t feel safe” after Trump threats