Senate Pushes Back With War Powers Vote01/09 06:00

   The Senate advanced a resolution Thursday that would limit President Donald 
Trump's ability to conduct further attacks against Venezuela, sounding a note 
of disapproval for his expanding ambitions in the Western Hemisphere.

   WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Senate advanced a resolution Thursday that would 
limit President Donald Trump's ability to conduct further attacks against 
Venezuela, sounding a note of disapproval for his expanding ambitions in the 
Western Hemisphere.

   Democrats and five Republicans voted to advance the war powers resolution on 
a 52-47 vote and ensure a vote next week on final passage. It has virtually no 
chance of becoming law because Trump would have to sign it if it were to pass 
the Republican-controlled House. Still, it was a significant gesture that 
showed unease among some Republicans after the U.S. military seized Venezuelan 
leader Nicols Maduro in a surprise nighttime raid over the weekend.

   Trump's administration is now seeking to control Venezuela's oil resources 
and its government, but the war powers resolution would require congressional 
approval for any further attacks on the South American country.

   "To me, this is all about going forward," said Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, 
one of the five Republican votes. "If the president should determine, 'You know 
what? I need to put troops on the ground of Venezuela,' I think that would 
require Congress to weigh in."

   The other Republicans who backed the resolution were Sens. Rand Paul of 
Kentucky, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine and Todd Young of 
Indiana.

   Trump reacted to their votes by saying on social media that they "should 
never be elected to office again" and that the vote "greatly hampers American 
Self Defense and National Security."

   Democrats had failed to pass several such resolutions in the months that 
Trump escalated his campaign against Venezuela. But lawmakers argued now that 
Trump has captured Maduro and set his sights to other conquests such as 
Greenland, the vote presents Congress with an opportunity.

   "This wasn't just a procedural vote. It's a clear rejection of the idea that 
one person can unilaterally send American sons and daughters into harm's way 
without Congress, without debate," said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer 
of New York.

   Lawmakers' response to the Venezuela operation

   Republican leaders have said they had no advance notification of the raid 
early morning Saturday to seize Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, but mostly 
expressed satisfaction this week as top administration officials provided 
classified briefings on the operation.

   Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., who forced the vote on the resolution, said he 
believes many Republicans were caught off guard by the outcome. He said that 
Trump's recent comments to The New York Times suggesting U.S. oversight in 
Venezuela could last for years -- combined with details revealed in the 
classified briefings -- prompted some lawmakers to conclude that "this is too 
big to let a president do it without Congress."

   The administration has used an evolving set of legal justifications for the 
monthslong campaign in Central and South America, from destroying alleged drug 
boats under authorizations for the global fight against terrorism to seizing 
Maduro in what was ostensibly a law enforcement operation to put him on trial 
in the United States.

   Republican leaders have backed Trump.

   "I think the president has demonstrated at least already a very strong 
commitment to peace through strength, especially in this hemisphere," said 
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. "I think Venezuela got that message 
loudly and clearly."

   A vote on a similar resolution in November narrowly failed to gain the 
majority needed. Paul and Murkowski were the only Republicans voting in favor 
then.

   Young in a statement said he supported the operation to capture Maduro, but 
was concerned by Trump's statements that his administration now "runs" 
Venezuela.

   "It is unclear if that means that an American military presence will be 
required to stabilize the country," Young said, adding that he believed most of 
his constituents were not prepared to send U.S. troops to that mission.

   House Democrats were introducing a similar resolution Thursday.

   The rarely enforced War Powers Act

   Trump criticized the Senate vote as "impeding the President's Authority as 
Commander in Chief" under the Constitution.

   Presidents of both parties have long argued the War Powers Act infringes on 
their authority. Passed in 1973 in the aftermath of the Vietnam War -- and over 
the veto of Republican President Richard Nixon -- it has never succeeded in 
directly forcing a president to halt military action.

   Congress declares war while the president serves as commander in chief, 
according to the Constitution. But lawmakers have not formally declared war 
since World War II, granting presidents broad latitude to act unilaterally. The 
law requires presidents to notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying forces 
and to end military action within 60 to 90 days absent authorization -- limits 
that presidents of both parties have routinely stretched.

   Democrats argue those limits are being pushed further than ever. Some 
Republicans have gone further still, contending congressional approval is 
unnecessary altogether.

   Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a close Trump ally who 
traveled with the president aboard Air Force One on Sunday, said he would be 
comfortable with Trump taking over other countries without congressional 
approval, including Greenland.

   "The commander in chief is the commander in chief. They can use military 
force," Graham said.

   Greenland may further test the limits

   Graham's comments come as the administration weighs not only its next steps 
in Venezuela, but also Greenland. The White House has said the "military is 
always an option" when it comes to a potential American takeover of the world's 
largest island.

   Republicans have cited Greenland's strategic value, but most have balked at 
the idea of using the military to take the country. Some favor a potential deal 
to purchase the country, while others have acknowledged that is an unlikely 
option when Denmark and Greenland have rejected Trump's overtures.

   Democrats want to get out in front of any military action and are already 
preparing to respond. Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego said he expected soon to 
introduce a resolution "to block Trump from invading Greenland."

   Greenland belongs to a NATO ally, Denmark, which has prompted a much 
different response from Republican senators than the situation in Venezuela.

   On Thursday, Sen. Roger Wicker, chairman of the Senate Armed Services 
Committee, met with the Danish ambassador to the United States, Jesper Moller 
Sorensen. Also in the meeting were the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee, New Hampshire Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, and the head of 
Greenland's representation to the U.S. and Canada, Jacob Isbosethsen.

   "There's no willingness on their part to negotiate for the purchase or the 
change in title to their land which they've had for so long," Wicker, R-Miss., 
said afterward. "That's their prerogative and their right."

   Wicker added that he hoped an agreement could be reached that would 
strengthen the U.S. relationship with Denmark.

   "Greenland is not for sale," Isbosethsen told reporters.