Five Senate Republicans voted Thursday to advance a bipartisan resolution on the War Powers Act to block President Trump from using military force against Venezuela, a proposal that if enacted would unravel the administration’s plan to take control of Venezuela’s oil exports.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), the sponsor of the bipartisan measure, voted with Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Todd Young (R-Ind.) to discharge the resolution out of committee and bring it to the floor.
A vote to pass the resolution itself is expected next week. The Senate is likely to vote to proceed to resolution on Monday and spend the rest of week debating it.
The resolution still needs to pass the House — where a similar measure failed in a close vote last month — and it faces a certain veto from Trump.
There likely aren’t enough votes in either chamber to override Trump, something that requires a two-thirds majority.
Even so, Senate passage of the resolution to block further use of military force “within or against Venezuela” without authorization from Congress is a major symbolic victory for lawmakers alarmed over Trump’s threats to project power throughout the Western Hemisphere.
Senators in both parties are alarmed Trump will deploy “boots on the ground” in Venezuela, something the president didn’t rule out during a press conference Saturday after the overnight raid to seize Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas.
The measure is sponsored by Paul, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) and Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).
A similar measure failed in early November — only garnering two Republican votes, from Paul and Murkowski — but Collins said Thursday that circumstances have changed, explaining why she flipped her vote to a yes.
She pointed out Trump says the U.S. will “run” Venezuela and hasn’t ruled out the possibility of deploying U.S. troops to the country if needed to maintain order.
“With Maduro rightfully captured, the circumstances have now changed. While I support the operation to seize Nicolás Maduro, which was extraordinary in its precision and complexity, I do not support committing additional U.S. forces or entering into any long-term military involvement in Venezuela or Greenland without specific congressional authorization.”
Collins said invoking the War Powers Act at this moment “is necessary, given the president’s comments about the possibility of ‘boots on the ground’ and a sustained engagement ‘running’ Venezuela, with which I do not agree.”
Young said he voted to advance the resolution because he said Congress would need to authorize the deployment of U.S. troops to Venezuela.
“The President and members of his team have stated that the United States now ‘runs’ Venezuela. It is unclear if that means that an American military presence will be required to stabilize the country. I – along with what I believe to be the vast majority of Hoosiers – am not prepared to commit American troops to that mission,” Young said in a statement.
“Although I remain open to persuasion, any future commitment of U.S. forces in Venezuela must be subject to debate and authorization in Congress,” he said.
Hawley said Congress must approve any decision to deploy U.S. troops to Venezuela for any extended period of time.
“With regard to Venezuela, my read of the Constitution is that if the president feels the need to put boots on the ground there in the future, Congress would need to vote on it. That’s why I voted yes on this morning’s Senate resolution,” he said.
Sponsors of the legislation had hoped there would be more Republican support for stopping military operations against Venezuela after the administration conducted the weekend mission, which killed more than 100 people and left seven U.S. troops wounded.
“A number of the colleagues who voted ‘no’ last time told me, ‘I think this is premature because I think the president is bluffing,’” Kaine said of the reason some Republicans gave for voting against the measure in November.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said he was not shocked by the result of Thursday’s vote. He said it is “unfortunate” that the Senate floor will be tied up next week debating the Trump’s war powers when Congress still needs to pass nine appropriations bills before the Jan. 30 government funding deadline.
Maverick Democratic Sen. John Fetterman (Pa.) suggested Wednesday he would vote against the measure but then surprised observers by poking his head into the chamber and flipping a thumbs-up sign to vote “aye.”
Every other Democrat supported advancing the proposal.
Fetterman had told reporters Wednesday that it would have blocked the successful mission against Maduro, which he called on Democrats to celebrate.
“That would have prohibited that, then I can’t vote for that,” he said, comparing the strike against Venezuela to last year’s precision strike by U.S. Air Force and Navy forces against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Fetterman explained in a statement Thursday that he voted to advance the resolution to continue the debate on Venezuela on the Seante floor.
“I believe the arrest of Maduro was a positive development for Venezuela and its people,” he said. “I voted AYE on this resolution to discharge it from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee so we can continue this important debate on the floor of the Senate,” he said.
The prospects for passing a resolution to restrain Trump’s power as commander in chief through the House are uncertain; a companion House measure sponsored by Reps. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) failed last month by a 211-213 vote.