Commerce, Justice, Science; Energy and Water Development; and Interior and Environment Appropriations Act, 2026

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I rise today to raise a point of order on the War Powers Resolution before the Senate, which I reserve the right to do at the close of my remarks and after Senator Kaine moves the matter forward.

I understand many of the sentiments people have about war powers and the balance between Congress and the President. There is truly clear tension between the branches and the Constitution on this matter, and, of course, that has reared its head many, many times during the existence of our country.

Putting U.S. troops in hostility is an incredibly serious matter. These are American lives on the line, and we should not expose them to danger unless there are vital national interests, and, of course, we should not ask them to engage in endless wars.

We are not debating those issues here today. What we are debating is trying to stop something that is not happening. Let me say that again. The objective of this resolution is to stop something that is not happening.

The resolution is relatively short--three pages long. It is full of the usual whereases, wherefores, et cetera, et cetera. But this is the operative language. It is very clear:

Congress hereby directs the President to terminate----

terminate--

the use of the U.S. Armed Forces for hostilities within or against Venezuela.

That is what we are voting on today. We are attempting to direct the President to terminate the use of the U.S. Armed Forces for hostilities within or against Venezuela. Only Congress can dream this up.

Now, I know there are a lot of people who think this is a very powerful institution, and it is, indeed, but even this institution cannot stop something that isn't happening, and that is exactly what the resolution directs the President to do.

Currently, there are no U.S. forces engaged in hostilities in Venezuela. The President did authorize actions that were limited in scope, short in duration, and done to protect U.S. interests and citizens. The operation only saw 200 troops, and they were inside Venezuela, on Venezuela's soil, for less than 2 hours. Those troops engaged with some unfortunate Cuban guards, who are no longer with us, for 27 minutes. That is what this was made up of. It was incredibly brief, targeted, and very successful.

The War Powers Act requires a President to submit a report to Congress within 48 hours of ``introducing U.S. forces into hostilities.'' The President did that. If U.S. troops stay in hostilities, the President is required to submit reports to Congress ``periodically,'' is the word used. Sadly, the War Powers Act never required the President to submit a report to Congress when hostilities ended. It should have been in the bill; it wasn't.

For this reason, I sent a letter to the President asking him to confirm that there are no U.S. forces engaged in hostilities in Venezuela. Now, I knew that. You all knew that. You were all in the briefing when we got it. However, since this was raised and people were trying to stop something that isn't happening, I asked the President of the United States to confirm that it is not happening. Obviously, they responded--the administration responded and said clearly that there are no hostilities and no troops in Venezuela.

I sent a letter to the President, and the response confirmed that the operation has ended, that it is over, that there are no troops there, that there is nothing to terminate.

There are no U.S. forces in hostilities.

Now, I know some of my colleagues will argue that a vote for this resolution is a prospective statement about limiting future action in Venezuela. That is not what it says. They argue we still have ships in the Caribbean. Clearly, the President is ready to invade again, they say. But, again, that is not what the resolution says. It says cease the hostilities that are going on. No language in this resolution addresses future action, and, indeed, the War Powers Act doesn't allow that unless there are ongoing hostilities.

As we have seen in the days since the operation, the administration is enforcing U.S. sanctions and seizing vessels that are violating them. Many of those sanctions were created by the laws passed by Senators voting here today, and the War Powers Act has no binding authority to constrain the President's Commander in Chief powers before U.S. forces are put into hostilities. Nothing in the act does that, nor does the Constitution allow it.

If the President was to deploy U.S. forces again, the administration has committed they would require, as is required by law, to send a new report under the law, and Congress could then act. That is the law.

Let me be clear. No President, Republican or Democrat, will ever consider a prospective War Powers Resolution vote as binding on the President's constitutional article II powers as Commander in Chief, and they shouldn't. Having 535 ``Commanders in Chief'' is a really, really bad idea, and our Founders knew that.

President Trump is laser-focused on protecting American interests while also avoiding costly and life-threatening conflicts. The recent actions in Venezuela were limited in scope, short in duration, and done to protect U.S. interests and citizens. What President Trump has done in Venezuela is the definition of the President's article II constitutional authorities as Commander in Chief.

Similarly, President George H.W. Bush authorized limited military operations to arrest and bring Panama's Manuel Noriega to the United States to stand trial for drug-related charges. Interestingly, that lasted 2 weeks, and there were thousands of troops involved--not done in a very short period of time with only a handful of troops--and the Democrats applauded President Bush for his action.

For years, my Democratic colleagues have called for Maduro's removal. You heard me the other day read statements that my Democratic colleagues have made. But when President Trump actually made that happen, now they say: How dare he do this. This is TDS, Trump derangement syndrome, at its obvious worst.

I firmly believe the operation in Venezuela was a good thing. I understand that some of my colleagues disagree with me, but that does not give this body the right to block the Commander in Chief's article II authority and defy every law of gravity and try to stop something that isn't happening.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source