Vote on the Iran War? GOP Congress Hopes It Just Ends First

The clock is ticking on President Donald Trump’s war in Iran, and congressional Republicans hope the fighting finishes before they’re forced to weigh in.

The war will hit the 60-day mark at the end of April, a moment that, under a strict reading of US law, requires the president to seek approval from Congress to continue military action (though the time can be extended for 30 more days). If the conflict continues to either deadline, it could force a perilous vote for Republicans, pinning them between the president and an unpopular war.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said this week he hopes it doesn’t get to that point.

“Most of us, I believe, feel pretty good about what the American military has achieved,” Thune said Tuesday. Pressed on what would happen at the 60-day mark, he said, “hopefully that question won’t be a necessary one that we’ll have to answer.”

Republicans’ eagerness to avoid a formal role in the war — through votes or public hearings — is another example, analysts and Democrats say, of a Congress that has routinely put itself on the sidelines. The light touch also suggests Republicans are reluctant to take ownership of the war, but don’t want to formally cross Trump.

“One thing that really marks this conflict is just how little engagement with Congress we’ve seen, and how weak Congress’s response to that has been,” said Matthew Waxman, who served as a National Security Council aide in the George W. Bush administration.

Some of that dynamic likely comes from the administration’s general disdain for Congress, Waxman said. And some of it likely stems from Trump’s apparent belief that the war would be over quickly.

“It does seem like this administration has never really been prepared for protracted conflict,” said Waxman, who now teaches at Columbia Law School.

‘Abdicating’ Power

Presidents in both parties have for decades asserted broad authority to enter conflicts without a say from lawmakers. They’ve often been given leeway from their own party in Congress.

But in some cases, lawmakers have held public hearings to demand information and create a platform for public debate about wars. This Congress hasn’t held any.

When Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought appeared for a budget hearing Wednesday and was pressed for information about the war’s price tag, he refused.

Democrats say it’s unacceptable for Congress to disengage from a conflict that has killed thousands, shaken US alliances, and spiked gas prices.

“It continues a trend that we’ve seen for a long time,” said Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), accusing the GOP “of abdicating their role as a separate branch of government, and it’s even more egregious when we’re a country at war.”

Republicans have blocked multiple Democratic resolutions to rein in Trump’s war powers, including in both the Senate and House this week.

“They are hoping it ends without them having to take more difficult votes,” said Jordan Tama, an American University professor who studies the politics and process of US foreign policy.

They may get their wish: Trump on Thursday suggested a peace deal is near, though officials in other countries predict it could take months.

Most Republicans argue that Congress doesn’t need to play a bigger role at this stage.

“I approve of what the president’s doing,” said Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) doubted lawmakers’ ability to act.

“Congress is incapable of having a role. It’s incapable of almost everything,” he said. “It certainly is incapable of waging the war.”

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said lawmakers are getting information in classified briefings, and that oversight should remain private while the fighting is ongoing, to protect soldiers.

GOP Nerves

Still, some Republicans are showing nerves about the length and economic consequences of the conflict.

“We need an exit strategy that will bring down energy prices in this country quickly,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said this week, adding, “I heard about it constantly while I was at home.”

Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.), chair of the Agriculture committee, also said he hoped the war would end soon, citing worries about fuel and fertilizer prices.

While Congress, under the Constitution, has the power to declare wars, presidents have long entered fights without lawmakers’ say-so. The War Powers Resolution of 1973, passed in the aftermath of Vietnam, aimed to prevent an extended conflict without approval from Congress.

On paper, it gives the president 60 days to conduct operations, while allowing them to also seek an extension of 30 days. After that, they need congressional approval.

But the deadlines have often been stretched by creative interpretations from presidents in both parties, including by Bill Clinton in Kosovo and Barack Obama in Libya. In Clinton’s case, his administration presented a supplemental defense spending bill passed by Congress as tacit approval. Trump could potentially do the same even if there’s no deal in Iran, perhaps by citing the ceasefire.

Absent a formal debate, Democrats vowed to keep forcing war powers votes. The resolutions have little chance of success, but Democrats say they put a spotlight on the conflict.

“At least we’ll make clear to the American people who owns this war,” said Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.). “I don’t think the War Powers Resolution means the president can do whatever the hell the president wants with no oversight for 60 days.”

Public hearings, meanwhile, can’t stop a president, but, Tama said, they can shape the public’s understanding of a war, and force administrations to articulate their goals and strategies.

So far in this conflict, briefings have been private and classified. Democrats say the public should see and hear more.

“The American people would be absolutely appalled to know how little planning went into this war,” said Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.).