Should the Trump Administration Be Prohibited From Taking Military Action in Venezuela Without Consulting Congress? (H.R. 1004)
Do you support or oppose this bill?
What is H.R. 1004?
(Updated September 9, 2019)
This bill — the Prohibiting Unauthorized Military Action in Venezuela Act — would prohibit the president from using funds to take any military action related to Venezuela without the approval of Congress.
Argument in favor
While the Maduro regime continues to abuse the Venezuelan people through corruption and persecution, Congress should do whatever it can to prevent the Trump administration from potentially committing the U.S. military to a costly and ill-considered intervention in Venezuela that’d only make the situation worse.
Argument opposed
The president has the power under the War Powers Resolution to commit the U.S. military to combat for a limited period of time before getting congressional approval. Military intervention in Venezuela should remain an option in case the situation worsens and it becomes necessary to stabilize the region.
Impact
Military; Venezuela; Congress; and the president.
Cost of H.R. 1004
A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.
Additional Info
In-Depth: Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) introduced this bill to prohibit the use of funds for military action in Venezuela without Congressional authorization:
“The Maduro regime’s corruption and negligence has devastated Venezuela’s economy, starved its people, and brought the nation to the brink of collapse. While we all want a brighter future for the Venezuelan people, the Trump administration does not have authorization from Congress to use military force in Venezuela. It would be a betrayal of the American people, who do not want another military intervention overseas, to risk the lives of our servicemembers.”
In a letter to his Congressional colleagues seeking cosponsors for this bill, Rep. Cicilline wrote:
“We have all watched in horror as the Maduro regime has destroyed Venezuela’s economy, starved its people, and engaged in widespread corruption and repression. We all want a better future for the people of Venezuela. However, like many of you, I am concerned by reports that the Trump Administration is considering a military option in Venezuela. The Administration does not have authorization to use military force in Venezuela and it would be illegal under U.S. law, inappropriate, and foolhardy to attempt a military intervention to resolve the crisis there. The American people do not want another U.S. military intervention overseas.”
House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel (D-NY) has ruled out U.S. military intervention in Venezuela. In his opening statement at a hearing on the political situation in Venezuela in mid-February 2019, he said:
“I do worry about the president’s saber rattling, his hints that U.S. military intervention remains an option. I want to make clear to our witnesses and to anyone else watching: U.S. military intervention is not an option.”
Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has said that the military might have to intervene in Venezuela if Russia places weapons there. He also suggested that Congress should be, but doesn’t have to be, consulted:
“I would say consult [Congress], but I don’t think it’s necessary. If there is a threat that reaches the threshold of the president having the ability, the constitutional ability of deploying troops, then that’s an unknown. We don’t know right now.”
Retired Air Force Gen. Douglas M. Fraser, who was the Pentagon’s former top official in charge of South American operations, says there’s no “good reason” for the U.S. military to intervene in Venezuela right now. He says, “I don’t see a good reason for the military to be employed in this situation.”
This bill has 38 cosponsors, including 37 Democrats and one Republican. It also has the support of Win Without War and CREDO Action.
Of Note: Speculation over possible military involvement in Venezuela was raised in January, after National Security Advisor John Bolton was photographed at a White House press briefing holding a yellow notepad with “5,000 troops to Colombia” written on it. Bolton didn’t comment on the note, but has said military intervention in Venezuela isn’t imminent, although “all options are on the table.”
The War Powers Resolution allows the president to commit the U.S. military to combat for up to 60 days followed by a 30 day withdrawal period unless Congress passes an authorization for use of military force (AUMF) or formally declaring war. The president is required to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing troops, and if Congress authorizes military action beyond the scope of the War Powers Resolution then the president is required to update Congress at least once every six months about the status, scope, and duration of the conflict.
Media:
-
Sponsoring Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) Press Release
-
Sponsoring Rep. David Cicilline (R-RI) Dear Colleague Letter
-
CREDO Action (In Favor)
-
Win Without War (In Favor)
-
The Hill
-
The Hill (Context)
Summary by Lorelei Yang
(Photo Credit: iStockphoto.com / guvendemir)
The Latest
-
Should U.S. Implement a New Tax on AI to Fund Worker Benefits?The debate As technology advances, artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more integrated into our society. While leaders in AI read more... Artificial Intelligence
-
SCOTUS Hears Arguments of Abortion Pill Mifepristone CaseUpdated March 27, 2024, 12:30 p.m. EST On Tuesday, March 26, the Supreme Court heard arguments about the mifepristone case, read more... Women's Health
-
IT: ⛑️ It's American Red Cross Giving Day, and... How will you give back today?Welcome to Wednesday, March 27th, philanthropists and entrepreneurs... It's American Red Cross Giving Day - a time to ensure the read more...
-
Moscow Concert Hall, Russia’s Deadliest Attack in DecadesOn Friday, March 22, at least four men fired automatic weapons into a sold-out show at the Crocus City Hall auditorium in read more... Public Safety