The battle over President Donald Trump’s campaign against Iran has moved from the battlefield to the budget office. For months, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and a small cohort of anti-war Republicans have pressed the administration on the legality of the conflict, but concrete progress has been limited. As the continuing resolution that funds the federal government approaches its December 11 expiration, Democrats see a narrow window to leverage the budget process for a strategic purpose.
Advocates such as Hannah Morris vice president of government affairs for the liberal, pro-Israel advocacy group J Street argue that the upcoming deadline will test whether Democratic leaders are ready to “stretch themselves, put up a fight and get uncomfortable.” The stakes revolve around a single question: can a threat of a government shutdown compel the Trump administration to halt its open-ended campaign in the Middle East?
December 11 deadline creates leverage for Democrats
The continuing resolution, which has kept the government afloat since the last shutdown, is set to expire on December 11. Lawmakers could attach a rider that explicitly bars the use of any allocated funds for operations against Iran. If the Senate and House fail to pass a revised spending bill, a shutdown would ensue, putting immense pressure on the executive branch to acquiesce.
Democratic leaders have been tight-lipped about their willingness to risk such a shutdown. When asked by a network anchor, Jeffries replied, “Listen, we’ll deal with the appropriations process when we deal with the appropriations process” deflecting while emphasizing a continued push on war-powers resolutions. The ambiguity leaves observers wondering whether the party will gamble political capital for a decisive anti-war move.
War-powers resolutions and the 1973 law
Since the conflict ignited on February 28 Democrats and a handful of Republican dissenters have leaned on the 1973 War Powers Resolution which restricts presidential authority to launch hostilities without congressional consent. In June both chambers approved a new war-powers resolution targeting the Iran campaign, yet the Trump administration dismissed it as unconstitutional and proceeded unabated.
Supporters of the June vote maintain that the administration should still be bound by the resolution’s language, but many admit that a budget-based approach could carry more enforcement teeth. As Will Lawrence an environmental activist, noted in a recent debate, the fight may now hinge less on formal resolutions and more on the fiscal levers that shape military spending.
Defense bill showdown and the upcoming Congress
The upcoming National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) offers another battleground. Critics argue that without explicit restrictions, the massive defense package would effectively give the administration a blank check for the Iran war. Hassan El-Tayyab legislative director at the Friends Committee on National Legislation, warned that “they shouldn’t pass a massive defense bill while leaving the administration free to pursue yet another open-ended war in the Middle East.”
Senator Jack Reed the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Representative Adam Smith ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, have expressed openness to using the NDAA or appropriations bills as a lever, but both stress the need for bipartisan support. Smith told The Intercept, “I am open to exploring options for using the NDAA or appropriations bills as a way to end the war, but I am not confident that there is sufficient Republican will.” With the next Congress set to convene on January 3 Democrats anticipate an even stronger hand in shaping military funding and oversight.
Whether the current Congress pursues a shutdown gambit, pushes additional war-powers resolutions, or waits for the newly seated Democratic majority to wield its gavel, the underlying calculus remains the same: cut the money, force negotiations. Former State Department official Brian Finucane summed up the strategic logic, noting that “if they are serious, they should be willing to play hardball, and that would require using the power of the purse.”
