House Dems. introduce bill to limit Trump's war powers on Iran
June 24 (UPI) -- House Democrats of the foreign affairs, armed services and intelligence committees have introduced a War Powers Act resolution to rein in President Donald Trump's ability to make war with Iran after he bombed the Middle Eastern country over the weekend.
The brief two-page resolution introduced Monday directs Trump to remove the U.S. military "from hostilities" with Iran aside from those protecting the U.S. mainland, and prevents him from going to war against Iran without congressional authorization, as is required by the War Powers Resolution of 1973.
"President Trump must not be allowed to start a war with Iran, or any country, without Congressional approval," Reps. Gregory Meeks, ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Adam Smith, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee and Jim Himes, ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said Monday in a joint statement.
On Saturday night, Trump directed the U.S. military to bomb three nuclear facilities in Iran. The bombing, followed by Trump making statements about regime change in Tehran, raised concerns that the United States would be entering into another war in the Middle East, and without congressional approval.
The resolution, however, was introduced just hours after Trump claimed Iran and Israel had agreed to a cease-fire.
The three Democratic lawmakers said that despite Trump's claims that the nuclear facilities were "obliterated," they still do not know whether the strikes eliminated Iran's nuclear weapons capabilities.
"The administration has offered no clear strategy," they said in support of their resolution.
"Without a coherent strategy for preventing Iran's program from bouncing back, including through diplomacy, we risk further escalation. No thoughtful deliberation nor careful planning occurred here -- and serious actions demand serious debate, not professional impulse."
The resolution is a competing motion to a bipartisan measure introduced last week by Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro- Khanna, D-Calif.
The measures come as lawmakers, primarily Democrats, seek to restrain Trump's powers to prevent what they fear could be another Middle Eastern quagmire, just a few short years after the U.S. finally exited Afghanistan.
A dozen Democratic lawmakers who served in the U.S. armed forces issued a letter Monday voicing their support for a War Powers Act resolution, stating "we refuse to make those same mistakes."
"We can all agree that more debate was needed before Iraq and Afghanistan," they said in the joint letter. "We need to take the time to learn from our mistakes. We need to take the time to involve both the American people and Congress -- this is what our Founders intended, and that is what the Constitution requires."
The 12 lawmakers are Reps. Salud Carbajal, D-Calif., Gil Cisneros, D-Calif., Herb Conaway, D-N.J., Chris Deluzio, D-Pa., Maggie Goodlander, D-N.H., Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., Ted Lieu, D-Calif., Jimmy Panetta, D-Calif., Pat Ryan, D-N.Y., Bobby Scott, D-Va., Derek Tran, D-Calif., and Eugene Vindman, D-Va.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
30 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Musk vows to start a third party. Funding's no issue, but there are others.
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Even some of Musk's own supporters have expressed doubts about the direction he now plans to take, preferring that he stay focused on the business ideas that fueled his net worth of roughly $400 billion. Advertisement But as his improbable bid to buy Twitter and front-and-center role in the 2024 election showed, Musk has defied expectations before. If nothing else, he could make life difficult for lawmakers he says have reneged on their promise to cut spending. Advertisement 'Every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame!' Musk wrote on X, the social media platform he bought when it was still named Twitter, this week. 'And they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth.' Musk, who didn't respond to a request for comment, has already identified his next target: the reelection campaign of Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky), who opposes Trump's signature legislative package. Urged to support Massie by former GOP congressman Justin Amash, a Trump foe who declared himself an independent in a 2019 op-ed decrying the two-party system as an 'existential threat,' Musk replied, 'I will.' Representative Thomas Massie speaks to the media following a vote to stop a government shutdown at the Capitol on March 11. Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post Massie did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday about Musk starting a third party, but he posted a Fox News story about the chief executive's plans to donate to his campaign. 'An interesting thing just happened,' Massie wrote on X. With Trump already working to defeat Massie next year, the race in northern Kentucky appears to be the first to pit the two billionaires against each other. On Capitol Hill, where the Senate passed the massive tax and spending bill Tuesday afternoon, there were few signs of alarm about Musk. Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Oklahoma), when asked by reporters Monday evening about Musk's threats to punish Republicans who vote for Trump's plan, said the billionaire is not top of mind at the Capitol. 'Doesn't matter, doesn't matter at all, no. It's not even been a conversation of ours,' he said. 'I mean, if we ran every time someone said something about our election, we'd live in fear the whole time.' Advertisement Senator Markwayne Mullin bounces a rubber ball through the Ohio Clock Corridor on Monday, on Capitol Hill. Tom Brenner/For The Washington Post Unless that someone is Trump. Two Republican lawmakers who have been at odds with Trump both said in rapid succession this week that they would not seek reelection. Rep. Don Bacon (Nebraska), who has taken issue with Trump's tariffs and policy toward Russia, announced his retirement Monday. The day before, Sen. Thom Tillis (North Carolina) said he would not seek a third term after Trump vowed to punish him for opposing his legislative package. That leaves Massie as one of the only points of Republican resistance in Congress to Trump's agenda. Musk's decision to cast himself as a potential third-party leader raises questions about his political vision. It has just been in the last few years that he has evolved from Democratic-leaning Trump critic to staunchly Republican Trump acolyte. Trump allies mocked his latest incarnation. 'I think it's the ketamine talking in the middle of the night,' said Trump pollster Jim McLaughlin, referring to media reports about Musk's drug use that he has denied. 'Trump is the Republican Party right now. He is the conservative movement. There's not a hankering for a third party with Elon Musk.' A Gallup poll last year found that 58 percent of U.S. adults agree that a third party is needed in the U.S. because the Republican and Democratic parties 'do such a poor job' of representing the American people. Support for a third party has averaged 56 percent since 2003, according to Gallup. History shows that third-party candidates are rarely victorious. Ross Perot, one of the most successful independent candidates for president in American history, received about 19 percent of the popular vote and no electoral college votes. Advertisement 'Third parties are traditionally spoilers or wasted votes,' said Lee Drutman, senior fellow at the New America think tank. 'But if Musk's goal is to cause chaos and make a point and disrupt, it gets a lot easier.' Ralph Nader's presidential bid in 2000 was a classic example of a disruptive campaign, Drutman said, contributing to an outcome so close that Republican George W. Bush prevailed over Democrat Al Gore only after the Supreme Court weighed in. Ralph Nader acknowledges his mother at an event at the National Press Club before watching the election night voting unfold. Lucian Perkins/TWP The trend in the U.S. toward increased political polarization also makes it more difficult for third-party candidates, Drutman said. When Perot ran in 1992, Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush were both running as centrists, allowing Perot to argue that there wasn't much daylight between the two major parties. By contrast, the differences between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump in the 2024 election were much more stark. America's political diversity also complicates matters, Drutman said. 'If there clearly was a party in the center that was more popular than the Democrats or the Republicans, then someone would have organized it by now,' he said. 'It's not like we've just been waiting for Elon Musk to show up.' Musk entered politics in earnest during the 2024 presidential election. Beyond his massive financial investment, Musk frequently appeared alongside Trump at rallies and cheered him on over X. But since Trump's win, Musk's experience in politics has been turbulent. Earlier this year, the billionaire and groups affiliated with him donated more than $20 million in a bid to help conservatives take control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. In the final stretch of the campaign, Musk drew derision for wearing a foam cheesehead at a town hall and for directing his America PAC to pay registered voters for signing petitions. A couple of voters won $1 million prizes. Advertisement But even with the race flooded with Musk's cash, the conservative judicial candidate — whom Trump also endorsed — lost by a wide margin in April. Musk's personal presence in the race did his candidate harm, said Barry Burden, director of the University of Wisconsin's Elections Research Center. Conservative voters appreciated Musk's money, but that wasn't enough to overcome negative perceptions of an ultra-wealthy outsider injecting himself into the state's politics, Burden said, adding that Musk's presence galvanized greater liberal turnout. 'A new party is going to benefit most from Musk if they can draw on his resources but keep him in the background,' Burden said. 'And if he can portray himself as an innovator and a tech entrepreneur — and somebody who is really contributing to the American economy and funding this new operation without being its front person — I think that's probably going to lead to the most success.' Musk floated his idea of a new party nearly one month ago on June 5, after days of criticizing the massive GOP tax bill as a measure that would burden the country with 'crushingly unsustainable debt.' 'Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?' Musk wrote, along with a poll. Since then, Musk has regularly posted about starting a new party and going after lawmakers who vote for the spending bill. 'If this insane spending bill passes, the America Party will be formed the next day,' Musk wrote Monday. Advertisement A person who has served as a sounding board for Musk, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter, questioned Musk's ultimate strategy in undermining a party he had hoisted to victory beyond wanting 'to be in the driver's seat.' 'I agree our government is broken, but it's a tougher problem to fix than landing a rocket,' the person said. Paul Kane contributed to this report.
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House members in mad scramble back to DC to vote on Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill' after heading home for July 4
Members of the House of Representatives from both parties were forced to return to Washington, D.C. to vote on President Donald Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' after the Senate passed it, Politico reported. With Trump exerting great pressure on Speaker Mike Johnson to get the bill to his desk for a signing before the July 4 holiday, the House plans to vote on the bill as soon as possible. That triggered a mad dash back to the nation's capital and comes amid a Republican rift over the amended bill — which would force cuts to Medicaid and makes states shoulder more of the cost for food assistance while extending the 2017 tax cuts Trump signed. Republican Rep. Nancy Mace posted that she and her team would travel back from South Carolina by van. We have secured a van for a DC road trip tonight to make it in time for votes on BBB tomorrow. Hoah! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 — Nancy Mace (@NancyMace) July 1, 2025 'We have secured a van for a DC road trip tonight to make it in time for votes on BBB tomorrow,' Mace posted. Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who is running for Illinois' open Senate seat, hosted a Zoom town hall as he drove 14 hours to Washington after his flight was canceled. We made it. Drove overnight from IL to vote NO on this Large Lousy Law. — Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (@CongressmanRaja) July 2, 2025 'We made it,' he said. 'Drove overnight from IL to vote NO on this Large Lousy Law.' By coincidence, Rep. Derek Tran of California wound up stranded in the Pittsburgh airport, so he and fellow Democratic Rep. Chris DeLuzio of Pennsylvania drove to Washington and hosted a virtual town hall as well. Democratic Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin posted how his flight was canceled because of thunderstorms, so he would drive to Chicago to make an early flight to Washington. The bill passed the House of Representatives narrowly last month, partially due to the fact that three Democratic members of Congress had died. House Speaker Mike Johnson has scheduled a vote for the morning. The vote comes after the Senate conducted a marathon 27-hour vote-a-rama before passing the bill by a 51-50 margin with Vice President JD Vance breaking a tie in the Senate. Three Republicans--Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine and Thom Tillis of North Carolina--opposed the bill. But many House members have criticized the bill. During a House Rules Committee hearing, Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, who criticized the bill last month but nonetheless voted for it, said the Senate 'failed' with the bill. Plenty of Republican members also fear the cuts to Medicaid could disproportionately hurt their constituents.
Wall Street Journal
30 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
What the Halt in U.S. Weapon Supplies Means for Ukraine
The Trump administration's withholding of critical Patriot interceptor missiles and other weapons from Ukraine is a body blow to the embattled country's efforts to withstand Russia's mounting and increasingly deadly aerial assaults. Even before the decision, Kyiv was struggling to counter Russian technology, tactics and troop numbers. Russia is already deploying maneuverable ballistic missiles, able to avoid the vaunted Patriot air-defense system's radar, and launching record numbers of drones to bombard Ukraine every two or three nights. A halt in the supply of interceptors from the U.S. will heap further pressure on Ukraine.
