The lawmakers who bucked their parties on the war powers resolution

Three Republicans and eight Democrats bucked their parties on a resolution aimed at reining in President TrumpDonald TrumpTrump hails Arizona Senate for audit at Phoenix rally, slams governor Arkansas governor says it's 'disappointing' vaccinations have become 'political' Watch live: Trump attends rally in Phoenix MORE’s ability to launch additional military actions against Iran without first receiving authorization from Congress. 

GOP Reps. Thomas MassieThomas Harold MassieEthics panel upholds 0 mask fines against Greene, other GOP lawmakers House Ethics panel upholds 0 mask fines against GOP lawmakers California Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight MORE (Ky.), Francis RooneyLaurence (Francis) Francis RooneyPricing carbon can help solve the infrastructure funding dilemma Allies of GOP leader vow to oust Liz Cheney Republican rips GOP lawmakers for voting by proxy from CPAC MORE (Fla.) and most notably Trump ally Matt GaetzMatthew (Matt) GaetzLawmakers introduce bipartisan Free Britney Act Performance or performance art? A question for voters in 2022 (and 2024) Six takeaways: What the FEC reports tell us about the midterm elections MORE (Fla.) opted to vote with Democrats on the measure while moderate Democratic Reps. Ben McAdams (Utah), Anthony Brindisi (N.Y.), Joe CunninghamJoseph CunninghamTop cyber Pentagon official overseeing defense contractor project placed on leave Joe Cunningham to enter race for South Carolina governor Republicans race for distance from 'America First Caucus' MORE (S.C.), Kendra HornKendra Suzanne HornWhy does Rep. Johnson oppose NASA's commercial human landing system? The US's investment in AI is lagging, we have a chance to double it What should Biden do with NASA and the Artemis Program? MORE (Okla.), Stephanie MurphyStephanie MurphyHouse erupts in anger over Jan. 6 and Trump's role We must address the declining rate of startup business launches Moderate Democrats call for 9/11-style panel to probe COVID-19 origins MORE (Fla.), Josh GottheimerJoshua (Josh) GottheimerLawmakers spend more on personal security in wake of insurrection Six takeaways: What the FEC reports tell us about the midterm elections Democrats face daunting hurdles despite promising start MORE (N.J.) and Elaine LuriaElaine Goodman LuriaMisled condemnation of the Lebanese Armed Forces will help Hezbollah Clyburn: Trump could be called to testify before Jan. 6 panel The Hill's 12:30 Report - Presented by Goldman Sachs - Trump Org CFO's expected indictment MORE (Va.) voted against the measure. 

The concurrent resolution — introduced by freshman Rep. Elissa SlotkinElissa SlotkinHouse erupts in anger over Jan. 6 and Trump's role House passes host of bills to strengthen cybersecurity in wake of attacks Democrat unveils bill to allow only House members to serve as Speaker MORE (D-Mich.), a former Department of Defense official and CIA analyst —  ultimately passed the House in a 224-194 vote.


While Trump tweeted ahead of the vote encouraging Republicans to remain unified against the measure — which Democrats introduced in response to his decision to launch an airstrike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani — Gaetz said he felt comfortable voting for the resolution after his amendment stripping language taking aim at the president for targeting Solemani was added. 

"I don't think that our country needs to get pulled into another forever Middle East war in the absence of congressional approval. I'm very pleased that my amendment stripping out any reference to Soleimani, stripping out any critique of the president was adopted, and as a result, I'm going to vote for the resolution," he told The Hill.  

"I had a very productive conversation with the president and I know that he wants to end these wars as badly as I do. Matter of fact, he told me that he wants to end these wars even more than I do."

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who is known for his libertarian leanings, said he believes Congress needs to reclaim its Article I war powers.

“This vote isn't about supporting or opposing President Trump. I voted for President Trump. I plan to vote for President Trump again. This vote is about exercising our constitutional authority. But more importantly, our moral obligation to decide when and where our troops are going to be asked to give their lives. Congress needs to do more,” he said on the floor ahead of the vote.  


“We need to debate our involvement in Afghanistan and then bring our troops home and debate our involvement in Iraq and then bring our troops home. And we don't need another war and if we do go to war, it needs to be with the blessing and support of the people and a mission that our soldiers can accomplish and we follow that of the vision of our founding fathers and debate it here on the floor of the House.”

While a handful of GOP lawmakers defected on the measure, the majority of conservatives rallied behind the president, with even some of the most vocal advocates for Congress holding the power to oversee and declare war voicing support for the president’s decision to take out Soleimani. 

“There are specific issues in this bill that I think are problematic. I think, first of all, this is a messaging bill,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), a co-chairman of the bipartisan War Powers Caucus and chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus told The Hill in an interview. 

“This is a political messaging bill, this is not a serious visits to what I think needs to be serious, bipartisan consideration of the AUMF,  the War Powers Act and how we deal with exigent circumstances as well as deal with the constitutional directive that Congress is the one that declares war  and instead of getting carte blanche to the president and Executive Branch.” 

On the Democratic side, Murphy, a leader of the Blue Dog Coalition and former national security specialist at the Department of Defense, voiced concerns the measure would limit potentially necessary response to aggressions against the United States.  


“There is no question Qassem Soleimani met his just end. While Americans may have different views on the timing and wisdom of the strike on Soleimani, the United States now faces new and evolving threats from Iran and its proxies—and tens of thousands of American servicemembers and other personnel remain in harm’s way. We must be prepared to act swiftly, proportionally, and effectively to keep America and our allies safe,” she said in a statement, adding while she doesn’t support the measure, she feels Congress should provide “rigorous oversight” over the administration’s policy in the Middle East. 

“The War Powers Act of 1973 already restricts the president’s ability to engage our nation in military conflict without authorization from Congress. Based on my experience as a national security specialist in the Pentagon and on classified briefings, I voted against the War Powers Resolution today because I am not prepared to unduly limit our nation’s ability to respond to different contingencies that may arise.”

And Rep. Max RoseMax RoseOvernight Defense: Austin takes helm at Pentagon | COVID-19 briefing part of Day 1 agenda | Outrage over images of National Guard troops in parking garage Austin sworn in as nation's first Black Pentagon chief We lost in November — we're proud we didn't take corporate PAC money MORE (D-N.Y.), an Army veteran, applauded the president’s efforts to de-escalate the conflict in Iran, and argued while he believes Congress “must be proactive” in fulfilling its constitutional duties in declaring war and authorizing military force, he doesn’t believe the resolution helped further that goal. 

“President Trump was justified in killing a terrorist who was responsible for the murder of hundreds of American servicemembers and was in the process of planning to kill more. I appreciate the President’s efforts to de-escalate conflict in the face of Iranian retaliation and support his diplomatic efforts and economic sanctions to advance our goals of ensuring Iran does not gain nuclear weapons and to end their support of terrorist activities,” he said in a statement ahead of the vote. 

“I know all too well the real costs of war and sending troops into harm’s way is the most consequential decision I could make. Unfortunately, today’s War Powers Resolution is a non-binding resolution that simply restates existing law and sends the message that war is imminent. I refuse to play politics with questions of war and peace and therefore will not support this resolution.”

Sen. Tim KaineTimothy (Tim) Michael KaineSenate GOP likely to nix plan Schumer feels pressure from all sides on spending strategy Manchin signals he'll be team player on spending deal MORE (D-Va.) introduced a similar resolution in the Senate that has received the support of GOP Sens. Rand PaulRandal (Rand) Howard PaulGOP Rep. Cawthorn says he wants to 'prosecute' Fauci Writer: Fauci, Paul clash shouldn't distract from probe into COVID-19 origins S.E. Cupp: 'The politicization of science and health safety has inarguably cost lives' MORE (Ky.) and Mike LeeMichael (Mike) Shumway LeeBiden signals tough stance on tech with antitrust picks Overnight Defense: US launches another airstrike in Somalia | Amendment to expand Pentagon recusal period added to NDAA | No. 2 State Dept. official to lead nuclear talks with Russia US launches second Somalia strike in week MORE (Utah).