War powers Iran measures split Congress as Senate blocks binding vote
The Senate rejected a binding Iran war powers measure while the House backed a symbolic rebuke, as oil prices rose above $100.
By Sarah Jenkins · Chief Macro Economics Correspondent
· 3 min read
Congress divided Thursday over war powers Iran measures aimed at forcing President Donald Trump to end U.S. hostilities with Iran, underscoring the political strain from a renewed conflict that has helped push Brent crude above $100 a barrel. The Senate voted 47-49 to stop a joint resolution under the War Powers Act, while the House voted 214-208 to approve a separate concurrent resolution opposing the war.
The votes were the first in Congress since Trump informed lawmakers that he had restarted the war with Iran after peace talks broke down. The renewed fighting followed several weeks of a fragile ceasefire and comes months before U.S. midterm elections, adding pressure on Republicans who hold narrow majorities in Congress.
The Senate measure, offered by Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., would have sought to force Trump to end hostilities in Iran under the War Powers Act. The chamber instead voted to kill the resolution, leaving the administration’s war authority in place.
“There is no good way out of a bad war,” Van Hollen said ahead of the vote. “This is an opportunity for this Congress to finally take responsibility.”
What did Congress do on Iran war powers?
The Senate rejected a joint resolution that was designed to compel an end to hostilities, while the House passed a concurrent resolution expressing congressional disapproval. A joint resolution can be sent to the president for consideration, while a concurrent resolution does not go to the president’s desk and does not become law.
The split result means Congress delivered a mixed signal: one chamber advanced a symbolic challenge to Trump’s Iran policy, while the other blocked the more consequential legislative route. Even if Congress were to advance a binding measure, Trump would be expected to veto legislation intended to force a withdrawal.
Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, voted in favor of the Senate resolution. Collins faces a difficult reelection campaign in Maine, a state described as reliably blue. Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania was the only Democrat to vote against the measure.
Republicans opposed to the resolution argued that Congress should not restrict the president during an active conflict. Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said a vote to force withdrawal would damage U.S. standing.
“If we vote now and Republicans voted to cut and run and force the president in the middle of this to withdraw, it would be a huge blow to American credibility,” Kennedy said.
Kennedy also said he did not believe the war would dominate the coming election. “I don’t think it’s the main thing; I think this election will be about the cost of living,” he said.
Oil and fuel prices rise as the conflict escalates
The renewed escalation has fed back into energy markets. International benchmark Brent crude topped $100 a barrel Thursday, while U.S. crude rose above $91 a barrel.
U.S. motorists are also paying more at the pump. The national average gasoline price rose to $4.09 a gallon, according to AAA.
Higher oil prices can raise costs for consumers and businesses through fuel, transport and input prices. For investors and policymakers, the congressional votes leave the war’s direction largely in the hands of the White House while energy markets continue to reflect the risk of a wider or prolonged disruption.
This story draws on original reporting from CNBC.
