By Robert Jimison
The House voted down an effort on Thursday to halt the war against Iran and force President Trump to go to Congress for authorisation, as a small bloc of Democrats joined nearly all Republicans in delivering an early sign of support for the war in the Middle East.
The vote was 219 to 212 to block consideration of a bipartisan resolution that would end offensive military operations in Iran that had not been approved by Congress.
The vote fell almost entirely along party lines, but it also highlighted splinters in both parties. Four Democrats crossed party lines to oppose the resolution, while two Republicans broke from their party to support it, citing concerns of executive overreach and disregard for the legislative branch.
“The Constitution is clear: Our Constitution provides Congress initiatory powers of war,” Representative Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky and the lead sponsor of the resolution, said during debate on the House floor, directly challenging members of his own party.
Mr Massie, who cosponsored the measure with Representative Ro Khanna, Democrat of California, noted that the War Powers Resolution of 1973 allows the president to go around Congress and exercise unilateral authority to use force only if there has been a declaration of war, specific statutory authorization or a national emergency created by an attack on the United States.
“None of those conditions exists today,” Mr Massie said.
After a series of classified briefings led by senior Trump administration officials, Democrats said the case had not been made that the president had needed to act unilaterally.
“The question is, was there any imminent threat requiring the use of force? The administration has not presented one,” Representative Gregory W. Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the Foreign Affairs Committee, said on Thursday. “In fact, the word ‘imminent’ does not appear even once in the administration’s own war powers notification.”
But Republicans opposing the resolution argued that Mr Trump was well within his legal authority to use force.
“We have seen Iran as an imminent threat against America not just for the last four days, not just for the last four months or four years, but for the last 40 years,” said Representative Brian Mast of Florida, the Republican chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee.
“Iran’s terror, which has caused the death of thousands of Americans, it has to stop,” he added. “They don’t warn us when they’re going to kill our Americans. They are an imminent threat.”
The vote came the day after the Senate also voted mostly along party lines to block a similar measure that would have forced Mr Trump to win approval from Congress to continue the military operation against Iran.
Congress and presidents have clashed for generations over war powers, and administrations have long sought to expand the bounds of executive authority on military matters, often with little pushback from the legislative branch. The current conflict in Iran has resurfaced the debate.
Along with Mr Massie, just one Republican, Representative Warren Davidson of Ohio, backed taking up the measure. Four Democrats — Representatives Henry Cuellar of Texas, Jared Golden of Maine, Greg Landsman of Ohio and Juan C. Vargas of California — broke with their party to oppose doing so.
Positions on presidential war powers have shifted sharply in Washington, with many Republicans who once criticised Democratic presidents for bypassing Congress now arguing that Mr Trump has broad authority to wage war against Iran without lawmakers’ approval.
When President Barack Obama launched strikes against Libya in 2011, Republicans were among his fiercest critics. Back then, the GOP forced through a resolution calling for the removal of forces in the region, and Democrats were split on the issue, with some supporting the president and others publicly criticising his decision to bypass Congress.
Today, lawmakers are positioning themselves on the issue mostly along partisan lines.
Many Republicans who spoke in opposition to the war powers measure on Thursday emphasised the strategic stakes of the conflict.
“This is a historic moment, one that could finally put the Middle East on the path to peace,” said Representative Michael McCaul, Republican of Texas. “Congress must stand with the president and our military to finally close, once and for all, this dark chapter of history and pave the way for lasting peace.”
Still, the vote posed a dilemma for some lawmakers in both parties. Two strongly pro-Israel Democrats, Representatives Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey and Jared Moskowitz of Florida, initially signalled they would oppose the resolution, expressing strong support for the operation in Iran and a reluctance to tie the president’s hands.
But on Thursday, they joined the majority of their party colleagues in supporting the effort.
In a lengthy statement, Mr Moskowitz said he had opposed the measure before the offensive on Iran began because he feared it would undermine the US position in negotiations with Tehran to rein in its nuclear program. But he said the sweeping and open-ended nature of the strikes had changed his mind.
“Regardless of how one feels about this war, or this president, Congress’s constitutional role in any declaration of war is a completely separate issue,” he said in the statement, adding: “Congress is on the verge of irrelevancy. We have done this to ourselves, and no one is coming to save us if we don’t show some sign of life.”
Mr Gottheimer said in a statement the failed vote in the Senate a day earlier changed the calculus. Support for the House measure, he said, shifted from a rebuke of the initial strikes against Iran — which he says he supports without questioning Mr Trump’s authority to carry them out — to “a clear call for this administration to articulate the goals for the mission, the end game and their plan to avoid a protracted conflict.”
 "US House blocks bid to halt Iran conflict, avoiding clash with Trump")
