WASHINGTON -- The Senate on Thursday rejected a bipartisan resolution to block President Donald Trump from conducting strikes against Venezuela as the U.S. continued to surge troops and military assets to the region.
Senators voted down the measure mostly along party lines, 51-49. The vote mirrored a similar unsuccessful effort last month to end the Trump administration's bombing campaign against alleged drug boats in the Caribbean Sea and the eastern Pacific Ocean.
Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., a supporter of the previous measure, said he voted against the resolution Thursday due to a "greater appreciation" for the legal rationale behind the boat strikes. Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Rand Paul of Kentucky were the only Republicans to vote in favor of the resolution.
Both measures were led by Democratic senators Tim Kaine of Virginia and Adam Schiff of California. Paul co-sponsored the latest attempt to assert Congress's constitutional power to declare war.
"The reason the Framers put this decision in the hands of Congress was because of a belief that we should not risk the lives of our service members unless there is a clear political consensus, as expressed by a vote in Congress, that the mission is worth it," Kaine said.
Nearly 20% of the Navy's deployed warships are being sent to the waters off Venezuela, with the world's largest and most powerful aircraft carrier -- USS Gerald R. Ford -- set to arrive soon. The U.S. has also flown B-52 and B-1 bombers along Venezuela's coastline in a show of force.
The buildup indicates the administration is aiming to use military action to oust Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, Schiff said. Trump expressed doubt in recent days that the U.S. would go to war with Venezuela but has also said Maduro's days as president are "numbered."
"If any other world leader moved this kind of firepower to another country's doorstep, we know what we would believe was taking place," Schiff said. "Americans do not want another war. They don't want American service members put in harm's way, either flying missions or with boots on the ground for a war not authorized by Congress."
Shortly after taking office, Trump designated several drug cartels as terrorist organizations, including Venezuela's Tren de Aragua. His administration has asserted the U.S. is in an "armed conflict" with cartels and will treat their members as "unlawful combatants."
The resulting strikes on boats alleged to be smuggling drugs have killed at least 66 people since early September. Legal experts and some lawmakers say the attacks are illegally targeting civilians and amounted to extrajudicial murder.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., argued Thursday that Trump as commander-in-chief should have the freedom to carry out the military operations as he sees fit.
Graham also contended that the 1973 War Powers Resolution, which requires the president to consult with Congress before committing troops to fight and withdraw them after 60 days if Congress doesn't grant its approval, was unconstitutional.
Lawmakers who disagree with the president's military actions should either seek to defund the operations through legislation or file an article of impeachment against the president, Graham argued.
"I would say that Venezuela, in the hands of Maduro, is an existential threat to the people of the United States," he said. "We've got to do more than blow up the boat. We've got to go to the problem on the land. Who loads the boats? Who makes the money off the boats?"
Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the House Intelligence Committee's top Democrat, said after a briefing with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth this week that the Trump administration did not appear to have plans to expand the boat strikes to direct attacks on Venezuela.
But the military buildup in the Caribbean -- the largest in more than 30 years -- has continued to fuel speculation that a U.S. campaign to forcibly remove Maduro is underway.
Paul warned Thursday that such an operation risked a host of unintended consequences, including further destabilization of the region and a threat to U.S. troops.
"Attacked countries often attack back. It is our soldiers in the field of battle, not the senators on this floor that will bear the brunt of the retaliation," he said. "By then, the time for debate will have passed. The Senate will have once again excused itself from the responsibility of governing and the United States will once again be at war."