Congress Strikes Back
Congress is defying the President on Iran, Ukraine, the slush fund, and more.
WaPo (“House votes to block Trump from ordering more strikes on Iran“):
The House passed a resolution Wednesday to block President Donald Trump from ordering further strikes on Iran, ratcheting up pressure on the administration to find a way to end the unpopular war.
The 215-208 vote marked the first time such a measure has cleared the House or the Senate on a final vote since the start of the conflict more than three months ago. The Senate advanced a similar resolution last month on a procedural vote, reflecting growing impatience with a war Congress hasn’t authorized.
The effort faces sizable hurdles, however, before Congress could force Trump to end hostilities.
In the House, four Republicans — Reps. Thomas Massie (Kentucky), Tom Barrett (Michigan), Warren Davidson (Ohio) and Brian Fitzpatrick (Pennsylvania) — joined Democrats in voting to force Trump to end the war.
“We are trapped in a war that won’t end because an incompetent president launched it thinking of only his own ego while failing to prepare for the consequences,” Rep. Gregory W. Meeks (New York), the top Democrat on the Foreign Affairs Committee, said during debate on the House floor. “Diplomacy is the only exit from this, not more bombing, not more bluster.”
[…]
The bill, which would also impose additional sanctions on Russia’s finance and energy sectors, came to the floor only after six Republicans broke ranks and sided with Democrats to support the effort.
Democrats have forced repeated votes on war powers resolutions in both chambers since the start of the conflict, which polling shows is unpopular. A New York Times-Siena College poll conducted in mid-May found that 64 percent of registered voters think Trump made the wrong decision in going to war with Iran; 30 percent believe he made the right decision.
The Hill (“House passes resolution to end Iran war, challenging Trump“) notes a rather important caveat:
The development is largely symbolic, since there are lingering disputes about whether the measure, known as a concurrent resolution, carries the force of law. And Trump is certain to contest the authority of the measure even if it’s also passed by the Senate, where it’s headed next.
An analysis by NYT White House correspondent Katie Rogers (“Republicans Begin to Test the Limits of Trump’s Power by Flexing Their Own“) takes a big-picture view:
[A]fter a retributive romp through primary season, Mr. Trump’s style of governing — unilateral, and often impatient — has collided with restive Republicans who seem to be exacting some political vengeance of their own.
On Wednesday evening, four House Republicans sided with Democrats to demand Mr. Trump withdraw U.S. forces from the conflict with Iran or win approval from Congress, rebuking a president who has repeatedly said he does not need congressional authorization to continue the conflict.
That came on the heels of another high-profile setback: a Republican revolt against a $1.8 billion fund to reward Trump supporters who claim political persecution by Democrats.
[…]
On other matters of national security, several Republicans pushed back on Mr. Trump’s decision to appoint Bill Pulte to serve as the acting director of national intelligence. In his role as director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, Mr. Pulte publicized the personal mortgage information of several prominent Trump critics, and pushed for federal investigations into them.
Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina said in a CNBC interview on Wednesday morning that he did not believe Mr. Pulte “has a prayer” of being confirmed by the Senate. (Mr. Tillis announced that he would not run for re-election last year, after coming under threat from Mr. Trump for opposing the sweeping tax bill the president crowed about in Japan.)
He said that Mr. Trump’s decision to appoint Mr. Pulte had jeopardized congressional efforts to extend a high-profile warrantless surveillance law, which is scheduled for debate later this month: “I am tired of amateur hour,” Mr. Tillis said of the Trump administration.
Later, Mr. Tillis told reporters that “I feel like there are people advising the president as if there is no election in November.”
The Atlantic’s Hannah Rosin takes a similar tack in “Is the GOP Starting to Defy Trump?“
A couple of weeks ago, several Republican senators not only criticized President Trump’s proposed $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” in a private meeting but “screamed” at Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, according to Senator Ted Cruz on his podcast.
“There were multiple senators yelling at the attorney general, saying this feels like self-dealing,” Cruz said, presumably echoing broader criticism that this fund seemed more like a slush fund for Trump’s allies and supporters. The administration has defended the fund as open to everyone. But Blanche announced this week that the administration was scrapping the plan. Whether the senators’ motivation was moral or simply practical—do they really need another headache before the midterms?—the headline is the same: Are Republicans finally pushing back on Trump?
Beyond this fund, Senate Republicans also forced Trump to abandon his request for nearly $1 billion in ballroom security funding. And yesterday, House Republicans broke ranks to rebuke Trump’s war in Iran, directing him to withdraw U.S. forces or win approval from Congress.
While I have been hopeful for many years that Congressional Republicans will grow spines, I have been looking for any glimmer of evidence that they have, but most of the evidence comes from those, like Tillis, whose political careers are over. Trump still holds enormous sway with the Republican nominating electorate and has, with rare exception, been able to punish those who defy him.
Still, Trump has only another two-and-a-half years left in his presidency. His unpopularity with independent voters, exacerbated considerably by the Iran War and the ensuing dramatic rise in gas prices, has made it likely that a lot of his Congressional co-partisans will lose their seats in November, even with intensive gerrymandering. At some point, they’re going to fear the general election voter more than getting primaried.
As to the vote on the Iran War, it is indeed largely symbolic. The War Powers Resolution is largely rhetorical, and its enforcement mechanism is a likely unconstitutional legislative veto. Still, that some Republican Members are feeling confident enough to cast a vote in defiance of the President is interesting.
The backlash against the ironically named Anti-Weaponization fund was predictable. And, while the Senate went along with a number of highly questionable appointees in critical posts at the beginning of the term, it looks very much like nominations for Director of National Intelligence and Attorney General are in real trouble this go-round.
Even supporters of President Trump should welcome a Congress willing to stand up for the interests of their constituents, even if motivated by self-preservation. That’s how the system was designed to work, after all.
