SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
war powers resolution
House Republicans Defeat Another Venezuela War Powers Resolution by 'Tightest Margin'
"The maniac in the White House does not have the authority to bomb and invade anywhere he wants across the globe," said Rep. Rashida Tlaib. "Congress must put an end to this."
Jan 22, 2026
The latest in a series of congressional efforts to rein in President Donald Trump's military aggression against Venezuela failed Thursday as Republican lawmakers again defeated a war powers resolution by the tightest possible margin.
House lawmakers voted 215-215 on H.Con.Res.68—introduced last month by Rep. James McGovern (D-Mass.)—which "directs the president to remove US armed forces from Venezuela unless a declaration of war or authorization to use military force for such purpose has been enacted."
Unlike in the Senate, where the vice president casts tie-breaking votes, a deadlock in the House means the legislation does not pass.
Every House Democrat and two Republicans—Reps. Don Bacon of Nebraska and Thomas Massie of Kentucky—voted in favor of the measure. Every other Republican voted against it. Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) did not vote.
The House vote came a week after Vice President JD Vance’s tie-breaking vote was needed to overcome a 50-50 deadlock on a similar resolution introduced last month by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY).
The War Powers Resolution of 1973—also known as the War Powers Act—was enacted during the Nixon administration toward the end of the US war on Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. The law empowers Congress to check the president’s war-making authority by requiring the president to report any military action to Congress within 48 hours. It also mandates that lawmakers approve any troop deployments lasting longer than 60 days.
Thursday's vote followed this month's US bombing and invasion of Venezuela and kidnapping of its president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife on dubious "narco-terrorism" and drug trafficking allegations. Trump has also imposed an oil blockade on the South American nation, seizing seven tankers. Since September, the US has also been bombing boats accused of transporting drugs in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean.
"If the president is contemplating further military action, then he has a moral and constitutional obligation to come here and get our approval," McGovern said following the vote.
House Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY) lamented the resolution's failure, saying, "The American people want us to lower their cost of living, not enable war."
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) said on Bluesky: "Only Congress has the authority to declare war. Today, I voted for a war powers resolution to ensure Trump cannot send OUR armed forces to Venezuela without explicit authorization from Congress."
Cavan Kharrazian, senior policy adviser at the advocacy group Demand Progress, also decried the resolution's failure.
“We are deeply disappointed that the House did not pass this war powers resolution, though it's notable that it failed only due to a tie," he said.
"As with the recent Senate vote, the administration expended extraordinary energy pressuring Republicans to block this resolution," Kharrazian added. "That effort speaks for itself: With the American people tired of endless war, the administration knows that a Congress willing to enforce the law can meaningfully curtail illegal and escalatory military action. We urge members of Congress to continue fully exercising their constitutional authority over matters of war.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Blindly Endorsing' Trump Crimes, Senate GOP Kills Venezuela War Powers Bill
"Senate Republicans continually fall in line behind Donald Trump, no matter how reckless, no matter how unconstitutional," fumed Sen. Chuck Schumer.
Jan 14, 2026
US Senate Republicans on Wednesday defeated the latest in a series of war powers resolution aimed at blocking President Donald Trump from further unauthorized military attacks on Venezuela, a result that came after the president pressured a pair of GOP lawmakers who previously voted to advance the measure to flip.
Vice President JD Vance's tie-breaking vote was needed to overcome a 50-50 deadlock on the resolution introduced last month by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) “to block the use of the US armed forces to engage in hostilities within or against Venezuela unless authorized by Congress” as required by the 1973 War Powers Act.
Two GOP senators who voted earlier this month to advance the resolution—Josh Hawley of Missouri and Todd Young of Indiana—voted against the legislation on Wednesday. This, after Trump publicly lambasted five Republican senators who voted to advance the bill, ensuring its temporary survival.
Paul and fellow GOP Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska joined Democrats and Independents who caucus with them, Sens. Angus King of Maine and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, in voting for the resolution.
"The chances of us getting into an endless war are even greater."
Hawley said he was swayed by Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who told the senator “point blank, we’re not going to do ground troops" in Venezuela following the bombing, invasion, and kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife earlier this month.
Young shared a letter from Rubio stating that Trump will “seek congressional authorization in advance (circumstances permitting)” if he decides on any “major military operations” in Venezuela. He also warned on social media that "a drawn-out campaign" in the Venezuela "would be the opposite of President Trump's goal of ending foreign entanglements."
The resolution's co-sponsors accused their Republican colleagues of enabling Trump's lawbreaking and endless wars.
"Senate Republicans continually fall in line behind Donald Trump, no matter how reckless, no matter how unconstitutional, no matter the potential cost of American lives," Schumer said at a press conference following the vote. "They go along with the president, who is defying what the Constitution requires."
"The chances of us getting into an endless war are even greater, because when the Republicans rubber-stamp everything [Trump] does, the restraints go away," Schumer continued. "Donald Trump said he's not afraid of putting boots on the ground in Venezuela when asked how long it would take—one year, two years, three years, even that wasn't long enough; he said much longer—that's not ambiguous."
"So why wouldn't our Republican colleagues just do what Congress is supposed to do, assert our authority, and let's have a debate?" Schumer added. "What has happened tonight is a roadmap to another endless war because this Senate, under Republican leadership, failed to assert its legitimate and needed authority."
Senate Republicans just BLOCKED the bipartisan War Powers resolution to end the illegal war in Venezuela. They voted for forever wars, and against the best interests of the American people.
— Senator Jeff Merkley (@merkley.senate.gov) January 14, 2026 at 4:07 PM
Other Democratic senators also decried Wednesday's vote, with Alex Padilla of California saying that the "Senate Republican majority just walked away from their constitutional duty and chose to rubber-stamp Trump’s ‘act now, plan later’ military intervention in Venezuela."
"They are blindly endorsing the actions of a president who cannot articulate a clear mission or long-term strategy in the region, putting American troops in harm’s way, and gambling with billions of taxpayer dollars," he continued. "Trump campaigned on ending endless wars, not starting new ones. He lied to Congress and the American people, cozying up to Big Oil while hiding behind claims of combating drug trafficking just after pardoning another head of state found guilty of helping smuggle 400 tons of cocaine into our country."
“If Senate Republicans were truly ‘America First,’ they would stand up for the Constitution they swore to defend and reclaim Congress’ authority instead of once again surrendering it to an out-of-control president," Padilla added.
Advocacy groups also condemned the Senate vote.
BREAKING: The Venezuela War Powers Resolution has failed in the Senate.J.D. Vance broke a 50-50 tied vote on a point of order to discard the resolution.70% of the U.S. opposes this war.This government isn't representing them. It's representing the oil & arms industries.
[image or embed]
— CODEPINK (@codepink.bsky.social) January 14, 2026 at 3:51 PM
"What we saw was an effort to dissuade senators from exercising their jurisdiction over war by threatening political careers and offering nonbinding assurances the administration hopes Congress will rely on, even though its actions give Congress no reason to do so," Demand Progress senior policy adviser Cavan Kharrazian said.
"Congress’ war powers don’t rest on trust," he added, "they rest on law, and legal obligations don’t disappear because of promises."
Robert Weissman, co-president of the consumer watchdog group Public Citizen, said in a statement that “Donald Trump and Senate Republican leadership can bully their way out of a war powers resolution but that doesn’t change the basic facts: Trump’s bombing of Venezuela and abduction of its leader was wrong, unconstitutional, and a screaming violation of international law."
"Trump has dropped all pretense that this is anything other than a military action for oil and empire," Weissman continued. "Neither has any support among the American people, whose opposition to intervening in Venezuela will only grow—especially as US oil companies demand taxpayer subsidies and guarantees as a condition of investing in Venezuela."
“The so-called America First president has become the America Bombs First president, making the world a far more dangerous place," he added. "Shame on Republicans for failing to stand up, yet again, to what they know are authoritarian and unconstitutional actions.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
From Venezuela to Minneapolis, Protest Matters—Keep It Up!
More public pressure can blunt the Trump administration’s authoritarian ambitions.
Jan 10, 2026
Running a news weekly as I do, it’s always interesting to watch the narrative around developing stories that I might comment on as a journalist change quickly over days or even hours. Such is the case with two big national and international stories of great interest to many American citizens and residents this week: the capture of Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro by the US military under orders from President Donald Trump and the killing of Renee Nicole Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent (now identified as Jonathan Ross) in Minneapolis.
As more information pours in, both stories are changing by the minute at this point. We’ve seen the White House excitedly claim credit for a successful military action in Venezuela on Saturday that may turn out to have been more of a diplomatic and intelligence “win” than anything else, but the Senate just advanced a bipartisan measure to invoke the War Powers Act to block Trump from “using military force ‘within or against Venezuela’ unless he gets prior approval from Congress.”
Does the Senate vote mean that Trump, his administration, and their oil company cronies aren’t getting what they want from the country with the world’s largest oil reserves? No, they probably are for the time being, but it’s fascinating that five Republican senators crossed the aisle to vote with 47 Democrats, including conservative Dems like Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, to attempt to restrict presidential power. A clear result of public pressure on the pols to rein in executive authority.
After the tragic Minneapolis shooting, the immediate reaction of tens of thousands of people there and around the country, including here in Boston, was to get out in the street to protest. And Trump has been immediately and roundly condemned for being far too quick to declare the fatal shooting of a person who may have had nothing to do with the small anti-ICE protest on a residential block to be some kind of act of self-defense by an armed government agent against a “professional agitator.” On Thursday, Trump already began backing off his rhetoric under pressure from the public, the press, and the evidence of multiple videos from the scene to lamely say that the shooting victim “behaved horribly.”
I suggest that readers who are unhappy with the Trump administration get out in the streets and protest as often as possible.
Does this mean that anyone has a perfect understanding of either event at this juncture? No. Is every protest acting on the most solid information available. Also no.
But do I think that people protesting presidential overreach in the name of democracy are right to listen to their instincts about the actions taken by the US military in Venezuela and ICE in Minneapolis at the behest of the Trump administration?
Absolutely yes.
Such protest, as usual, is all over the road politically and otherwise. It’s messy. It’s emotional. It gets some things wrong or even misses forests for trees at times. Yet it’s the right thing to do. And it is working. Trump and his allies have not consolidated unlimited power. Far from it. The MAGA movement is fragmenting and the administration is under pressure from many directions.
In such an environment, the president needs as much of the public on his side as possible—with polls showing his popularity has been on the downswing for months.
So I suggest that readers who are unhappy with the Trump administration get out in the streets and protest as often as possible. Your actions won’t solve all of our fragmented nation’s problems and won’t make the Democrats into an actual opposition force. But they may well stop the US from becoming a tinpot dictatorship like the ones previous governments have forced on so many other countries in the Americas and create openings for the construction of a genuinely democratic opposition movement.
Which would be as good an outcome as we might hope for at the moment.
The original version of this article ran on January 8, 2026 at BINJ.News
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular