WASHINGTON (AP) — January 8, 2026 — 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. 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. Source
JACK REED
United States Senator for Rhode Island
January 8, 2026
U.S. Senate Advances Bipartisan Bill to Limit Trump’s War Powers
WASHINGTON, DC – To reassert Congress’s Article I powers to declare war and prevent President Trump from engaging in further unauthorized military action in Venezuela, the U.S. Senate voted 52-47 today to advance a bipartisan war powers resolution.
U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), the Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, voted to advance the resolution and reaffirm Congress’s role in determining when America goes to war. Prior to the vote, Reed delivered a floor speech urging the Senate to restore constitutional oversight of President Trump’s military operations.
Reed warned that the President’s military raid in Caracas—conducted without congressional approval and apparently driven by the ultimate goal of seizing Venezuelan oil reserves—represents a dangerous expansion of executive power and a profound failure of strategic planning.
“The Constitution is clear: Congress—not the president—declares war. No individual, not even the president, has the authority to drag our country into an unnecessary conflict against the will of the American people,” said Senator Reed. “President Trump has failed to articulate any credible strategy for Venezuela, but has admitted the U.S. could be there for ‘years’ and may require a significant military presence on the ground. That’s not what the American people want, and they certainly don’t want to risk our servicemembers lives and billions in taxpayer funds in Venezuela. They want us to focus on the cost of living, not foreign misadventures. Today the Senate voted to curtail President Trump’s ability to unilaterally wage war.”
Senator Reed, who spent months warning that the Administration’s boat strike campaign in the Caribbean was a prelude to military action in Venezuela, emphasized that while Nicolás Maduro’s removal from power is welcome, the Trump Administration has presented no credible plan for what comes next. He called on Congress to fulfill its constitutional duty to authorize military action and demand answers about the operation’s objectives, costs, and exit strategy.
Today’s 52-47 vote means the Senate moves forward with debate on a bipartisan war powers resolution from Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Rand Paul (R-KY). If the measure is ultimately approved by the upper chamber it must also be passed by the full U.S. House of Representatives.
A transcript of Senator Reed’s floor speech prior to the vote follows:
SEN. REED: Mr. President, for four months, my Democratic colleagues and I have come to the floor to warn against President Trump’s military operations in South and Central America. We have pointed out that his boat strike campaign was strategically incoherent, legally questionable, and – ultimately – not about narcotrafficking at all. We have argued that the Administration’s shifting legal justifications, refusal to give Congress straight answers and information required by law, and a massive military buildup pointed toward something larger than narcotrafficking.
Indeed, we warned that these actions were always directed at the government and economy of Venezuela.
That campaign has now culminated in a military raid on Caracas, the capture of Nicolás Maduro and his wife, and President Trump’s extraordinary declaration that the United States will “run” Venezuela and seize control of its oil reserves.
Let me be clear about something at the outset: Nicolás Maduro is a brutal dictator who has destroyed Venezuela’s economy, crushed democratic opposition, and fostered widespread corruption. He will not be missed. But, this operation was not designed to restore peace in Venezuela or protect America from the ravages of drugs.
Indeed, Mr. President, this operation is not about democracy. It is not about the suffering of the Venezuelan people. It is not even about narcotrafficking, despite the Administration killing more than 100 people in its strikes on alleged drug boats. In the President’s own words, this campaign is simply about seizing Venezuela’s oil and profiting from it.
The people of Venezuela have suffered extraordinary hardship under the Maduro regime. They have voted in multiple elections for new leadership, and have been denied their choice through fraud and repression. After everything they have endured, the people of Venezuela deserve to choose what happens next in their country. They do not deserve to have their future dictated by President Trump, Secretary Rubio, or anyone else in Washington.
Yet that is precisely what this administration intends to do. The plan presented by the White House is to simply force the remnants of the Maduro regime to grant the United States exclusive access to Venezuelan oil, or face the consequences of a blockade. That’s it; that’s the plan.
Not in the plan? Positive change for the people of Venezuela. There is no framework for elections or democratic transition. No serious assessment of the rival political factions inside Venezuela – factions that have been waiting for precisely this moment to seize power. I have seen no contingency plan for what happens when China, Russia, Iran, or Cuba – nations with deep economic interests in Venezuela – decide to back proxy groups in a country we have just destabilized. Nor have I heard any proposal for the next steps for countering narcotrafficking.
The Administration’s goals are aspirational at best. And aspirations are not enough when the stakes involve war and the futures of millions of people.
Mr. President, one of the first lessons I learned as an Army officer is that ‘hope’ is not a plan. Over my career – both in uniform and in Congress – I have seen the United States hope that its military interventions abroad would succeed. I have seen regime changes, nation-building efforts, and elaborate reconstruction schemes launched with confident predictions of success, only to collapse when encountered with reality on the ground.
And the reality is this: when we rely on the United States military as our primary tool of foreign engagement, we set ourselves up for failure. We have persistently misunderstood and misjudged the cultures, histories, and politics of the nations in which we have intervened, because we assume military might is enough. We imagine outcomes that align with our military and economic objectives, but are surprised when those outcomes fail. We consistently fail to plan for the “day after.”
Unless the Trump Administration gets serious, Venezuela will be no exception.
This isn’t about our military capabilities. We have the most formidable fighting force the world has ever seen. I am proud – and frankly, not surprised – that all elements of our military worked together to successfully execute such a dangerous and difficult mission in Caracas. Their skill, professionalism, and courage are beyond question.
But military capability is not the same as strategic wisdom. The ability to achieve tactical objectives does not guarantee beneficial long-term outcomes. And executing a successful raid does not constitute a plan for governing a nation of 28 million people.
Congress exists to provide oversight and scrutiny of the Executive Branch, not to cheer from the sidelines. I commend our servicemembers for their performance last weekend, but I am deeply concerned by the Trump Administration’s lack of serious planning for what comes next.
That is why this War Powers Resolution is necessary.
The Constitution vests the power to authorize war in Congress – not the President. President Trump has claimed this was just a ‘law enforcement’ mission. That is absurd. No matter how he describes it, the President waged war on a foreign nation without authorization, without notification to Congress, and without any explanation to the American people about what this operation will cost or what success will look like. That is a profound constitutional failure, and it must be corrected.
Mr. President, I hope I am wrong about the dangers ahead. I hope this administration is right, and the transition in Venezuela proceeds smoothly. I hope the Venezuelan people embrace this outcome and see their lives improve quickly. I hope the violent factions in Venezuela choose peace over conflict. I hope the economic recovery for the people of Venezuela justifies this enormous gamble.
But hope is not enough. And history suggests we should prepare for a far more difficult reality.
The question before us is whether Congress will fulfill its constitutional duty, or whether we will abdicate responsibility—again—and allow this
President to commit American military resources, credibility, and potentially American lives to an open-ended entanglement without authorization or accountability.
I urge my colleagues to support this resolution. I yield the floor.
###
October 16, 2025
Text: S.J.Res.90 — 119th Congress (2025-2026)
Introduced in Senate (10/16/2025)
119TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 90
To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
OCTOBER 16, 2025
Mr. KAINE (for himself, Mr. PAUL, and Mr. SCHIFF) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations
JOINT RESOLUTION
To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Congress has the sole power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the United States Constitution.
(2) Congress has not yet declared war upon Venezuela or any person or organization within Venezuela, nor enacted a specific statutory authorization for use of military force within or against Venezuela.
(3) United States Armed Forces actions within or against Venezuela, within the meaning of section 4(a) of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1543(a)), are either hostilities or a situation where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances into which United States Armed Forces have been introduced.
(4) The publicly reported authorization for the Central Intelligence Agency to conduct covert lethal operations within Venezuela, the significant augmentation of United States Armed Forces assets, personnel, and operations in proximity to Venezuela, and statements from United States Government officials regarding planning for ground strikes within Venezuela indicate imminent involvement of United States Armed Forces in hostilities within or against Venezuela.
(5) The question of whether United States forces should be engaged in hostilities within or against Venezuela should be answered following a full briefing to Congress and the American public of the issues at stake, a public debate in Congress, and a congressional vote as contemplated by the Constitution.
(6) Section 1013 of the Department of State Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1984 and 1985 (50 U.S.C. 1546a) provides that any joint resolution or bill to require the removal of United States Armed Forces from imminent engagement in hostilities without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization shall be considered in accordance with the expedited procedures of section 601(b) of the International Security and Arms Export Control Act of 1976.
SEC. 2. TERMINATION OF THE USE OF UNITED STATES FORCES FOR HOSTILITIES WITHIN OR AGAINST VENEZUELA.
(a) TERMINATION.—Pursuant to section 1013 of the Department of State Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1984 and 1985 (50 U.S.C. 1546a), and in accordance with the provisions of section 601(b) of the International Security Assistance and Arms Export Control Act of 1976, Congress hereby directs the President to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces for hostilities within or against Venezuela, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force.
(b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the United States from defending itself from an armed attack or threat of an imminent armed attack.
Vote Date: November 6, 2025
Vote Result: Motion to Discharge Rejected
Vote Counts: YEAs 49, NAYs 51
Measure Title: A joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.
Vote by Senator’s name
Alphabetical by Senator Name
Alsobrooks (D-MD), Yea
Baldwin (D-WI), Yea
Banks (R-IN), Nay
Barrasso (R-WY), Nay
Bennet (D-CO), Yea
Blackburn (R-TN), Nay
Blumenthal (D-CT), Yea
Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Yea
Booker (D-NJ), Yea
Boozman (R-AR), Nay
Britt (R-AL), Nay
Budd (R-NC), Nay
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Capito (R-WV), Nay
Cassidy (R-LA), Nay
Collins (R-ME), Nay
Coons (D-DE), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Cortez Masto (D-NV), Yea
Cotton (R-AR), Nay
Cramer (R-ND), Nay
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
Cruz (R-TX), Nay
Curtis (R-UT), Nay
Daines (R-MT), Nay
Duckworth (D-IL), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Ernst (R-IA), Nay
Fetterman (D-PA), Yea
Fischer (R-NE), Nay
Gallego (D-AZ), Yea
Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Nay
Grassley (R-IA), Nay
Hagerty (R-TN), Nay
Hassan (D-NH), Yea
Hawley (R-MO), Nay
Heinrich (D-NM), Yea
Hickenlooper (D-CO), Yea
Hirono (D-HI), Yea
Hoeven (R-ND), Nay
Husted (R-OH), Nay
Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Nay
Johnson (R-WI), Nay
Justice (R-WV), Nay
Kaine (D-VA), Yea
Kelly (D-AZ), Yea
Kennedy (R-LA), Nay
Kim (D-NJ), Yea
King (I-ME), Yea
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Lankford (R-OK), Nay
Lee (R-UT), Nay
Lujan (D-NM), Yea
Lummis (R-WY), Nay
Markey (D-MA), Yea
Marshall (R-KS), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Nay
McCormick (R-PA), Nay
Merkley (D-OR), Yea
Moody (R-FL), Nay
Moran (R-KS), Nay
Moreno (R-OH), Nay
Mullin (R-OK), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murphy (D-CT), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Ossoff (D-GA), Yea
Padilla (D-CA), Yea
Paul (R-KY), Yea
Peters (D-MI), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Ricketts (R-NE), Nay
Risch (R-ID), Nay
Rosen (D-NV), Yea
Rounds (R-SD), Nay
Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Schatz (D-HI), Yea
Schiff (D-CA), Yea
Schmitt (R-MO), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Scott (R-FL), Nay
Scott (R-SC), Nay
Shaheen (D-NH), Yea
Sheehy (R-MT), Nay
Slotkin (D-MI), Yea
Smith (D-MN), Yea
Sullivan (R-AK), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Nay
Tillis (R-NC), Nay
Tuberville (R-AL), Nay
Van Hollen (D-MD), Yea
Warner (D-VA), Yea
Warnock (D-GA), Yea
Warren (D-MA), Yea
Welch (D-VT), Yea
Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
Wicker (R-MS), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Young (R-IN), Nay
