[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 15 (Thursday, January 22, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H1317-H1325]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 REMOVAL OF THE USE OF UNITED STATES FORCES FOR HOSTILITIES WITHIN OR 
                           AGAINST VENEZUELA

  Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of January 
21, 2026, I call up the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 68) to 
direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from Venezuela that 
have not been authorized by Congress, and ask for its immediate 
consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 21, 2026, the concurrent resolution is considered read.
  The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 68

       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring),

     SECTION 1. REMOVAL OF THE USE OF UNITED STATES FORCES FOR 
                   HOSTILITIES WITHIN OR AGAINST VENEZUELA.

       Pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution (50 
     U.S.C. 1544(c)), Congress hereby directs the President to 
     remove United States Armed Forces from Venezuela, unless 
     explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific 
     statutory authorization for use of military force.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The concurrent resolution shall be debated 
for 1 hour, equally divided among and controlled by Representative Mast 
of Florida, Representative Meeks of New York, and Representative 
McGovern of Massachusetts, or their respective designees.
  The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mast), the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Meeks), and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Florida.


                             General Leave

  Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include any extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am going to say this twice, once for each of my 
colleagues over here managing, Representative Meeks and Representative 
McGovern: There are no troops in Venezuela.
  Let me say it one more time for you all: There are no troops in 
Venezuela.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, it was only last month that we stood on this floor 
debating this same resolution. My colleagues across the aisle defended 
the administration's claim that unauthorized U.S. military operations 
in the Caribbean and threats against Venezuela were about what? 
Stopping drugs.
  At that time, I asked a simple question. I asked--and never received 
an answer--if this was about drugs, why did the President pardon the 
former leader of Honduras, a convicted drug trafficker who bragged 
about shoving drugs up the noses of the gringos.
  The administration's own actions have since made the truth absolutely 
clear: This was never about drugs.
  The unauthorized January 3 operation was not conducted to address an 
imminent threat to the United States, nor to advance democracy in 
Venezuela. Donald Trump has abandoned even the pretense of national 
security.
  He has been very explicit about what his intent is: We are there to 
take Venezuela's oil. That is what this was about.
  He propped up Maduro's regime, praised Maduro's Vice President as a 
terrific person, and sidelined the democratic opposition, forcing Maria 
Corina Machado through the back door of the White House.
  Meanwhile, Marco Rubio, Pete Hegseth, and Stephen Miller posture as

[[Page H1318]]

viceroys of America's newest colony, while American taxpayers are on 
the hook to ensure Trump's oil baron friends are fed the spoils.
  Guess what. There is no plan for what comes next. There is no plan to 
deal with the entrenched military and paramilitary forces spread across 
a country twice the size of Iraq. There is no plan if the so-called 
acting President refuses to serve as Trump's puppet, and no explanation 
of what the President means when he says he is ``not afraid of putting 
boots on the ground.''

                              {time}  1430

  Mr. Speaker, this administration is winging it and driving the United 
States headfirst into another open-ended foreign conflict that, as 
history has shown, is destined to backfire in years to come.
  For those of my colleagues who deny this is warmongering, there is 
still a U.S. aircraft carrier parked in the Caribbean. Tens of 
thousands of young American men and women remain on standby. If the 
President wants to drag the United States into a war that the American 
people don't want--they don't want this--he must come to Congress 
first.
  The debate belongs on this floor. We have all asked for what the cost 
has been and what the cost will be to the American people. There have 
been no answers to that either.
  Let's be equally clear. Venezuela is not the end of this 
recklessness. In exchange for a rules-based system the United States 
built to extend our influence around the globe, Donald Trump is 
reducing the United States to a regional bully with fewer allies and 
more enemies. This isn't making America great again. It is making us 
isolated and weak.
  Donald Trump's new world order is not new. It is the old logic of 
empires. Might makes right. The strong take from the weak. It is the 
same backwards worldview that Vladimir Putin uses in Ukraine and the 
same logic China will cite when it looks at Taiwan. We have seen where 
that road leads. It leads to endless conflict.
  To my Republican colleagues, the American people want us to lower 
their cost of living, not enable war. Now is the time for my colleagues 
to stand by their oath of office and end this dangerous game before it 
is too late.
  It is time for Congress to reclaim our Article I authority that the 
Constitution gave us and say that enough is enough. A President is not 
a king. He is not an emperor. Without an act of Congress, he cannot 
invade a nation and set us down the road of war.
  Let us stand up and do our responsibilities. Let's see where Congress 
stands. Let's have a vote on this floor and see where the majority of 
the Members of the United States House of Representatives is. The 
people deserve to know.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to start by saying something simple that 
shouldn't be controversial in the people's House. On questions of war 
and peace, on questions of life and death, Congress is not supposed to 
be a potted plant. We don't get paid to outsource hard decisions. We 
don't get brownie points for showing up.
  Our Founders weren't naive about threats, but they were realistic 
about power. That is why they chose to entrust Congress with the power 
to make war--not the President, not the courts, not the States--but the 
elected Representatives of the people.
  Call me crazy, but I think if we abdicate that power, we are not only 
doing a disservice to the people we represent but we are violating our 
sacred oath of office, our oath to protect and defend the Constitution 
of the United States.
  The last time I brought up this resolution, I was told it was 
premature because there had been no strikes in Venezuela. Let me quote 
what my Republicans friends said in their own words.
  Chairman Mast said: `` . . . this resolution to me doesn't make much 
sense because we are not in hostilities inside Venezuela.''
  Congressman Keith Self said: `` . . . which is not necessary, as it 
removes our Armed Forces from hostilities against a country where there 
have been no hostilities.''
  Congressman Warren Davidson said: `` . . . is the contention that 
this is a present condition, that there are U.S. Forces in violation of 
the War Powers Resolution, or is it a hypothetical future?''
  Congressman   Tom McClintock said: ``If the President launched an 
unprovoked attack on Venezuela . . . without congressional declaration, 
we should have this debate. Until then, I think Democrats would do well 
not to cry wolf on such an important matter.''
  Even Susie Wiles, the President's own Chief of Staff, said that if he 
were to authorize some activity on land, then we would need Congress.
  We got lots of smug lectures from the other side. Guess what. On 
January 3, 2026, not only did Donald Trump authorize land activity in 
Venezuela, but his administration did not come to Congress beforehand. 
We were not even the first group that he talked to after the attack on 
Venezuela.
  I guess the best we can get from the current majority here is that 
there is never a good time for Congress to assert its war powers. It is 
either too soon or it is too late.
  I don't think it is too late because we are still dealing with the 
consequences of this unauthorized and unlawful military strike. Nicolas 
Maduro, a brutal tyrant, was removed from power. The Trump 
administration replaced Maduro with his own damned vice president. Is 
that the big victory that my friends think we should be celebrating? 
Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.
  They left in power the same illegitimate regime that rules through 
oppression, fraud, and violence. They left in control the same security 
apparatus that violates people's rights. They preserved the same 
corrupt cartel state.
  Am I missing something here? From what I can tell, the President put 
our troops in harm's way without congressional consent, all so that he 
could replace one dictator with another dictator. Everything is the 
same except the face at the podium.
  Now the President says he is the one running Venezuela. I don't even 
know what the hell that means.
  He says we control the oil. What happens if the Venezuelan people 
don't want that? Will he send troops into Venezuela? What is the 
clearly defined mission here? I don't know what it is.
  Look at what has happened since he claimed he is in charge. 
Repression has gotten worse. Security forces are interrogating people 
at checkpoints, confiscating phones, and detaining journalists. Again, 
I ask: What was this all about? We don't know what will happen next.

  Whether you support Trump's actions or oppose them, shouldn't we all 
agree that we should have a debate on this stuff and that we should 
authorize an expansion of military forces if that is what is in the 
future? That should be a debate. We should have a vote on it. That is 
all we are asking here.
  This is crazy. We can't be asleep at the switch. There is no 
oversight, no hearings, and no votes. It is just blind obedience to the 
executive. That is not the way this place is supposed to run.
  If my colleagues respect this institution, the House of 
Representatives, they will vote ``yes'' to stop this madness from going 
any further than it already has. We ought to vote on these issues.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, neither of my colleagues bothered to say anything about 
what their bill they are bringing forward actually does. They didn't 
say a word about it. Let's quote their own bill for them, since they 
clearly don't want to talk about it.
  They want to ``remove U.S. Forces from hostilities in Venezuela.'' 
That is what the bill says. Anybody can go and read it, black ink, 
white paper. Let's get straight to the point.
  The U.S. is not at war with Venezuela. I know they all predicted 
there was going to be some forever protracted war, but we were never at 
war with Venezuela. There are no boots on the ground. Democrats are 
asking us to vote on a resolution about a situation that literally does 
not exist.
  We do not have anybody there in Venezuela fighting. There are no 
tanks on the ground in Caracas. There are no snipers in the tree line. 
It doesn't exist. Again, we are not at war.

[[Page H1319]]

  Maybe they are conferring about that right now. Let me confer with my 
colleagues a minute.
  Are we at war?
  I confirmed with my staff we are not at war.
  Are there any troops on the ground?
  I confirmed with my staff also there are no troops on the ground.
  Mr. Speaker, they should confer with their staff. I see them doing 
that.
  Their Senate Democrat colleagues tried to bring this exact same 
resolution to the floor of the Senate, but even the Senate was smart 
enough to pull it because they didn't want to be embarrassed. Let's say 
it again. We are not at war.
  Most of the Democrats predicted that we were going to be in some 
forever war. Which, again, by the way, they said after the strike 
hitting the Iranian nuclear facilities, their nuclear infrastructure, 
they all said we were going to be in a forever war. We weren't.
  Then they said the same thing years ago when President Trump killed 
Qasem Soleimani. We were going to be in this forever protracted war. 
Guess what. We weren't. We haven't been, not for one moment since then.

                              {time}  1440

  My Democratic colleagues are batting zero in predicting forever wars. 
Operation Absolute Resolve was a law enforcement action to bring 
Nicolas Maduro, an indicted narcoterrorist with a $50 million bounty, 
to justice. President Trump finished the job.
  Thank you, President Trump, for finishing the job.
  It was literally over before breakfast. I have been in war. I can 
tell you that an operation that is over before breakfast is not a war.
  The Department of War--let me say this again--is not engaged in any 
hostilities within the Venezuelan territory or with the Venezuelan 
military. They are not in tank battles. There are no tactical 
operations centers there. There are no convoys. There are no U.S. mess 
halls over there. There are no field hospitals. There are no trenches 
with infantry soldiers shooting at each other. We were not even there 
long enough for soldiers to heat up an MRE.
  That is what we eat in the field in the military, guys.
  Yet, just to give you a level of peace of mind because you are 
curious about this, Secretary Rubio confirmed in his letter last week 
that no U.S. Armed Forces are in Venezuela. He also confirmed that, 
should there be any military operations that would put our forces into 
hostilities with Venezuela, that the administration will provide the 
appropriate notifications to Congress; he literally said this in his 
letter.
  What is this really about, this resolution that you all refused to 
even say a word about in your opening statements? It is about spite. It 
is about the fact that you don't want President Trump to arrest Maduro, 
and you will condemn him no matter what he does, even though he brought 
Maduro to justice with possibly the most successful law enforcement 
operation in history.
  Your hypocrisy is clear, as you chant and you lead your no kings 
protests, but when it comes to taking down a dictator, you crawl into a 
corner. You curl up, and you start to cry about it.
  This is about your base having protests to free Maduro. This is about 
appeasing your far-left friends. Now, whether my colleagues want to 
admit it or not, the world is a safer place because President Trump had 
the backbone and the stones to do what nobody else would: bring Nicolas 
Maduro to justice.
  Let me say this as affirmatively as possible: If anybody votes 
``yes'' on this War Powers Resolution that my colleagues didn't want to 
describe, they are stupid. Because, again, there is nobody at war and 
there are no forces in hostilities in Venezuela. It would be like them 
calling me today to take a pie out of the oven that we all ate a month 
ago.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their 
remarks to the Chair.
  Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, do you know what happened in the Senate? They had a 
vote. First, five Republicans joined Democrats, but in his general 
style, two of them were very threatened by the President and had to 
reverse their vote the next week.
  We need to have the vote here and see if the courage that the five 
first showed and the three that continued to show, whether my 
colleagues on the other side are going to have the courage to stand up 
and do their jobs and make sure that the power that we have in the 
House of Representatives to oversee the executive branch and not just 
be a patsy to this executive branch exists.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. 
Himes), the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee.
  Mr. HIMES. Mr. Speaker, not much surprises me anymore, but to sit 
here and to listen to the storied House Foreign Affairs Committee, 
chaired by somebody who calls the opposition stupid, to hear our 
motivations as we stand up for a fundamental constitutional prerogative 
mocked through ad hominem attacks, shame, sir. Shame.
  We are here because we are standing for our constitutional right to 
be consulted on the most consequential decision that the United States 
can make: whether we engage in hostilities and put young men and women 
at risk.
  The chairman's summer stock theater and cringey antics 
notwithstanding, this has nothing to do with whether there are troops 
on the ground in Venezuela. We will stipulate to your argument, 
pathetic as it is, Mr. Speaker.
  What this is about is whether what we saw happen 3 weeks ago will 
happen again. There were boots on the ground 3 weeks ago, and we didn't 
know about it. This resolution is about saying that on the most 
consequential thing that this Congress can do, we have a voice--the 
Representatives of the people, the Article I authority.
  Let's set aside Venezuela. I won't use that term again. Let's stand 
up for our constitutional rights to be consulted for what may happen 
tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, or next week. Not much surprises me 
anymore.
  Mr. Speaker, I have watched my majority friends completely abandon 
their policy positions, brutally anti-immigration because of this 
President, obliterating free trade, completely leaving behind 
everything that the Republican Party used to stand for, praising 
Vladimir Putin, and attacking our NATO allies.
  Mr. Speaker, policy flexibility is not the worst thing in the world. 
I wish it weren't happening because of the reason that it is happening, 
but policy flexibility is one thing. Yet abrogating your constitutional 
duty to be consulted into authorized force and then to be mocked for 
it, shame, sir. Shame.
  We need to stand up as an institution and say that we get consulted 
on the most consequential things that we can do.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Once again, Members are reminded to direct 
their comments to the Chair.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I just say to the distinguished chairman that his 
arguments are: It is either too early, or it is too late.

  Our troops were on the ground. Our troops were shot at. They were 
wounded. Thankfully, they are home and they are safe. With this, all we 
are saying here is that if you are going to expand and utilize the 
military again, you come to Congress and ask for a vote.
  That is not just our prerogative. It is our responsibility. It is in 
the Constitution. That is our damn job. If you don't want to do it, do 
something else. Yet it is our responsibility.
  In terms of the gentleman's interpretation of the War Powers 
Resolution, I will simply suggest that maybe he and his team go to the 
Congressional Research Service and get a briefing to understand how it 
works, but this is our responsibility. It is our job.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania 
(Ms. Houlahan).
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, it is really devastating to listen to the other side 
talking about how we somehow were not supposed to be told when boots 
went on the ground before. Somehow, we were lucky enough, by God's 
grace, that

[[Page H1320]]

nothing bad happened to the men and women in the service of our Nation. 
Yet they actually were injured, seven of them.
  The U.S. military is being used against Venezuela without 
congressional authorization, without transparency, and in ways that 
appear only designed to benefit the very powerful amongst us--the oil 
companies--and not the Venezuelan people, and certainly not our 
American people to whom we are obligated to represent. It is as simple 
as that.
  The American people don't want their sons or their daughters sent 
into harm's way for their missions to Venezuela or to Greenland or to 
anywhere else that are undertaken just to enrich corporations and the 
most wealthy amongst us and cronies of the President's, and to do 
nothing in the process to lower the cost of living, to help families 
afford housing or healthcare, or to secure a future for our children.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from Pennsylvania.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I am struck by the fact that we are at a 
place where we have maligned others in the past for brutish 
isolationism and for colonial instincts that we have long condemned in 
our own adversaries.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of this aisle to vote 
``yes,'' to do our jobs so that we may reaffirm our authority and rein 
in reckless action.
  Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, before I yield to my friend, I will say that 
this will probably be the only apology that they will get out of me 
today: I apologize for talking about the resolution and the text of the 
resolution that they still refuse to talk about. They are not willing 
to do that.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Arkansas (Mr. Crawford), chairman of the Intelligence Committee.

                              {time}  1450

  Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Mast for yielding and for 
his leadership on this critical issue.
  Mr. Speaker, make no mistake about it, we are not at war with 
Venezuela.
  Nicolas Maduro is a murderer, an autocrat, a narcoterrorist, and a 
thug who has oppressed his own people, stolen elections, and turned a 
once prosperous and free country into a desperate nation that millions 
have fled.
  Most importantly, as for the action that the United States took 
against him on January 3, he is a criminal, an indicted fugitive from 
U.S. justice.
  My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have demanded Maduro's 
removal for years, after the stolen 2024 election, the fraudulent 2018 
election, and the Constituent Assembly power grab in 2017.
  In fact, H. Res. 1409 of the 118th Congress is a Democrat-sponsored 
resolution with the unambiguous title of ``Standing in solidarity with 
the Venezuelan people and condemning Nicolas Maduro's attempt to steal 
the Venezuelan Presidential election.''
  Here is another Democratic hit, H.R. 8741 of the 118th Congress, 
pointing to the threat to our homeland, defining Maduro as a person of 
concern who has engaged in a ``long-term pattern or serious instances 
of activity adverse to the national security of the United States, the 
security of critical infrastructure of the United States, or the safety 
and security of United States persons.''
  Who can forget Democrat-sponsored H.R. 5670 of the 118th Congress 
that succinctly called for ``an end to the usurpation of Presidential 
authorities by Nicolas Maduro.''
  Instead of celebrating President Trump's historic leadership on this 
issue and the unmatched operational excellence of the United States 
military, law enforcement officers, and the intelligence community in 
carrying out this historic and heroic effort, House Democrats are once 
again putting politics before protecting the American people.
  Mr. Speaker, this hypocrisy is evident in the message coming from 
congressional Democrats. Earlier this month, Chuck Schumer stated that 
President Trump ``seems content to drag our country . . . into an 
endless war with no plan, no transparency, and nothing but wishful 
thinking.'' Nothing could be further from the truth.
  Operation Absolute Resolve was a masterfully, meticulously planned 
law enforcement operation supported by the U.S. military.
  I don't know how much clearer we must be with our colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle, but the U.S. is not at war with Venezuela. 
None of the actions taken by the Trump administration to execute an 
arrest warrant on a criminal constitutes war.
  The Trump administration has briefed both Chambers of Congress in 
detail on the operation to bring Maduro to justice, an action the 
Democrats in this Chamber would have celebrated had it been carried out 
by the feckless and failed Biden administration.
  Additionally, Secretary Rubio confirmed again to Congress on January 
14 that there are currently no U.S. troops in Venezuela and that the 
introduction of U.S. Armed Forces into future hostilities will be 
undertaken consistent with notification of the War Powers Resolution if 
required.
  Mr. Speaker, the hypocrisy of House Democrats is palpable this 
afternoon in this Chamber.
  I urge each of my colleagues to vote down this deeply flawed 
resolution and instead thank President Trump for continuing to take 
historic action to place the safety of the American people first.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Mast for his partnership and 
leadership.
  Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The last time we were here, the chairman was talking all about drugs. 
Yet, today, I have not heard anything about drugs. The President said 
it was about drugs. That was the imminent threat to the United States, 
allegedly. We don't hear anything about drugs. We don't hear anything 
about democracy. All we hear about is oil and taking those resources.
  The fact of the matter is, they talk about ``we are not at war.'' I 
know that an aircraft carrier is still sitting right there where we led 
the attack before, where the attack took place. I know there is a 
blockade taking place right now, so our military is still right off the 
shore of Venezuela.
  I know that we want to make sure that we take care of our 
responsibility as Members of the House of Representatives and have the 
oversight and safety of the President, should he decide to strike 
again, come to the Congress first.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Deluzio).
  Mr. DELUZIO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York for the 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, to respond to the notion of hypocrisy, that we should 
rely on the Secretary of State's notification when required, we were 
not notified--the Congress did not receive notification--or asked for 
authorization before Americans were sent to fight and to bleed in 
Venezuela.
  Seven Americans were wounded in that military operation. There is a 
functional blockade of Venezuelan oil. As others have pointed out here, 
Mr. Speaker, an aircraft carrier strike group sits nearby, poised to 
again send Americans into Venezuela should the President order it.
  Let's talk about hypocrisy. In the 118th Congress, this body voted on 
two War Powers Resolutions to remove Americans from hostilities that 
had not been authorized by the Congress. In those two votes, 52 
Republicans and 47 Republicans, respectively, thought that Congress 
ought to have a say about our war powers. What has changed? The party 
of the occupant of the White House. Be consistent, Mr. Speaker.
  I support this resolution.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman keeps talking about the resolution, and 
here it is. I did talk about the resolution, and let's talk about the 
resolution again. I have it right here. It is two pages.
  The way the resolution is written is to comply with the War Powers 
Act. The resolution would simply prevent further escalation. If you are 
watching at home, read it yourself, H. Con. Res. 68. The reason we 
think we need to do that is because the administration already did not 
get permission before escalating the first time.

[[Page H1321]]

  By the chairman's logic, the only time we can ever have a vote is if 
there are physically boots on the ground. That just is logically 
insane. It doesn't comport with the way the War Powers Act is written. 
By his logic, the President should be able to launch a preemptive 
nuclear war without congressional authorization. That is nuts.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Ryan).
  Mr. RYAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the time.
  Mr. Speaker, we face a fundamental question here: Who makes the 
decision to send our most precious resource, our young men and women in 
uniform, into harm's way? Is it a five-time draft dodger who has called 
them suckers and losers, or is it the American people with us as their 
voices?
  Mr. Speaker, I was on the receiving end of this same chicken-hawk bs 
for 27 months in combat in Iraq, and I don't need to be lectured by my 
colleagues. We all know how that went: thousands of American lives 
lost; trillions of dollars spent not on one, but two forever wars over 
the last 20-plus years that we should not have started in the first 
place; and, most importantly, no honest conversation with the American 
people about what would be required, what blood and treasure would be 
spilled halfway across the world.
  Now, we are seeing it all play out again. History doesn't repeat, but 
it certainly rhymes. We in this room had the Secretary of Defense and 
the Secretary of State come to Congress before the end of this calendar 
year and blatantly lie to our faces and, more importantly, lie to the 
American people. Why? Because they know it isn't right or popular.
  The last thing, Mr. Speaker, the American people want is another 
regime change war, a forever war for oil. I urge my colleagues to 
support this resolution and to not repeat history.
  Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, there it was again, a forever war. President Trump has 
never brought America into a forever war. Any operation he has 
conducted is pretty much done before breakfast, just like Venezuela.
  I think my Democrat colleagues can't wrap their heads around that 
something can be about more than one thing at a time. It can be about 
Maduro and his lawlessness. It can be about drugs. It can be about the 
people of Venezuela. It can also be about making sure sanctioned oil 
doesn't flow around the globe. It can be about more than one thing.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Diaz-Balart), my friend.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, here we go again. As Chairman Mast has 
said, there are no troops in Venezuela.
  Look, the only purpose of this resolution, let's be clear, is to 
counter and stop narcoterrorism and drug traffickers in this 
hemisphere.
  I know that so many on the radical left are upset that Maduro, the 
head of the Cartel de los Soles, was picked up and brought to New York 
to stand trial. These narcoterrorists are responsible for the deaths of 
thousands of Americans every single year because of drugs. Every time 
the U.S. eliminates one of these drug boats, it actually saves American 
lives.
  Let's talk about what is actually going on. While there are no U.S. 
troops, the men and women of the Armed Forces, what they are doing is 
they have struck 35 drug boats smuggling drugs that kill Americans. 
They have seized seven oil tankers attempting to evade sanctions.
  It is very simple. Let's not protect those drug dealers, those 
cartels. Let's protect the American people. The way to do that is to 
vote ``no'' on this resolution.

                              {time}  1500

  Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, again, my Democrat colleagues are not speaking 
about the words of the resolution, the basic grammar. It says: Remove 
forces from hostilities. There are no forces in Venezuela. They can't 
just make up words. I know they like to do that. They like to say 
plural pronouns can be used on one person and things like that, but 
they can't just make up grammar. Write the bill right if you want to do 
it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), an individual who has truly been 
fighting for democracy for the Venezuelan people, who wants them to 
have the right to vote, an individual who has stood and is trying to 
keep their TPS status so they are not forced back into the regime of 
Maduro.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  I rise in support of this resolution because I simply do not trust 
this President to truly prioritize democracy and the will of the 
Venezuelan people.
  I represent one of the largest Venezuelan communities in the country. 
Many of my constituents fled brutal repression under Chavez and Maduro. 
Most of them were glad to see Maduro captured and face justice, and so 
was I.
  Maduro is a murderous criminal who tortured, imprisoned, 
impoverished, and oppressed his people. He stole elections, jailed his 
opponents, drained his nation's wealth, and unleashed the largest 
peacetime refugee crisis in history.
  Mr. Speaker, 8 million Venezuelans were driven into exile.
  I was glad to see Maduro held accountable, and this resolution, as my 
colleague who just spoke, Mr. Diaz-Balart, would clearly know, would 
not preclude operations like the one that arrested him, especially if 
the administration finally does what they should have already done: 
come up with a day-after plan for democracy, present a coherent 
strategy to Congress, and make a case to the American people.
  Arresting Maduro does not fix Venezuela because Maduro did not 
destroy Venezuela by himself. He relied on criminal affiliates who 
helped him cling to power. Delcy Rodriguez, Jorge Rodriguez, Diosdado 
Cabello, Vladimir Padrino Lopez, all of them share Maduro's guilt, but 
instead of being thrown in jail, they were left in charge.
  The machinery of repression was left in place, and the democratic 
hopes of Venezuelans are being left behind.
  My constituents who celebrated Maduro's capture are horrified to see 
President Trump normalize relations with the same regime that forced 
them to flee. This President must not make the U.S. complicit in the 
brutal repression of Venezuelans which continues today.
  Yet, Trump continues to jeopardize the lives of lawful Venezuelan 
immigrants by forcing them back into the chaos after he terminated 
their TPS.
  Trump has lavished praise on Maduro's hand-picked replacement, Delcy 
Rodriguez, who ran the regime's torture dungeons. Meanwhile, he has 
dismissed and demeaned Venezuela's democratic leaders like Maria Corina 
Machado and president-elect Edmundo Gonzalez.
  In fact, President Trump hasn't said one word about seeking democracy 
or human rights in Venezuela.
  If Congress backs military action, then democracy, stability, and 
safety for Venezuelans should be the objective. But those aren't 
President Trump's goals. He only speaks about getting a cut of the 
regime's oil sales and ignores their ongoing repression.
  I have no illusions about the dangers this regime poses. I am open to 
the idea that military action may be needed to achieve democracy. If 
Trump truly cared about Venezuelan democracy, he has tools at his 
disposal. He has broad authority to defend our national security 
interests. He could employ covert action, enforce vigorous sanctions, 
support civil society groups on democracy's front lines, and take 
action, as he does, against cartels and narcoterrorists. He could use 
his ``tremendous leverage'' to push for elections in human rights 
because this resolution doesn't block any of that.
  Instead, Trump is just seeking profits for the same Big Oil companies 
who propped up Maduro for years. He moved on his own with no plan for 
democracy, and he swapped out one dictator for another and declared 
mission accomplished.
  My vote today isn't about the means that this President used to 
capture Maduro. Presidents should use the power they have to be tough 
on dictators who abuse their own people. But given his utter disdain 
for democracy and his callous disregard for the chaos and violence to 
which law-abiding Venezuelans are being deported, I simply

[[Page H1322]]

cannot give this President a blank check to put troops on the ground.
  For all we know, Trump plans to deploy troops to protect the regime's 
oil facilities, not to liberate Venezuelans. I have known Maria Corina 
Machado for years, but this week I was able to finally meet her in 
person for the first time. She is remarkable, inspiring, and I have 
total faith in her selfless dedication to bring Venezuela out of 
darkness. More importantly, Venezuelans have faith in her.
  When she spoke, she discussed the essential momentum the democracy 
movement needs and the danger of allowing this lingering dictatorship 
to reinforce its grip on power. She told us conditions on the ground 
are dire, that we cannot allow the regime and the military militias to 
strengthen their hold on power.
  Maria Corina has a vision to resurrect Venezuela, and there is a U.S. 
role to see it through. That is why it is so disturbing that her White 
House meeting ended with no firm commitments, no timeline for 
elections, and no guarantees from President Trump.
  Instead of opening a pathway to democracy, this President is focused 
on opening offshore accounts to hoard Venezuelan oil money.
  So I support this resolution because of my faith in Maria Corina 
Machado, not in spite of it. It is rooted in an ongoing commitment to 
standing resolutely with Venezuelans to demand an end to this illegal 
regime. It is aligned with my belief that a transition to democracy led 
by Maria Corina Machado and Edmundo Gonzalez must take place.

  I hope I am wrong about the President's motivation.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from Florida.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I hope I am wrong about the 
President's motivations, and he brings Congress a real strategy to 
transition Venezuela to democracy. I hope he was moved by Maria Corina 
Machado's vision and not just her Nobel Prize. I am a show-me person, 
not a tell-me person, and so far President Trump has shown that he is 
more concerned with seizing Venezuela's oil than freeing Venezuela from 
dictatorship. ``Hasta el final''; ``Until the end.''
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Castro).
  Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the President of the United States 
is now running Venezuela from Washington.
  On January 3, the President ordered a military operation to capture 
Nicolas Maduro and install the President's hand-picked successor, Delcy 
Rodriguez, as the interim president.
  President Trump went to war, removed a leader, and established a 
puppet government.
  The President executed this transition when the most popular 
opposition leader, Nobel Prize winner Maria Corina Machado, was out of 
the country. If he wanted to, the President could help her return to 
Venezuela. It is telling that he is not.
  Article I of the Constitution of the United States makes it clear 
that Congress has the sole authority to declare war.
  The President, in taking these actions without our consent, has 
trampled on the separation of powers and taken the American people into 
yet another war that they do not want and cannot afford.
  People are wondering and they are asking: What was it for? Was it to 
remove the socialists? No, the socialists are still in power. Delcy 
Rodriguez is a true believer in the same ideology and party that Hugo 
Chavez and Nicolas Maduro championed.
  Was it to remove drug dealers in the hemisphere? No, the same 
Venezuelan Government that he says is dealing drugs is still in charge 
because of him.
  So clearly this is not about socialists, and it is not about drugs.
  Donald Trump has said this is about oil and enriching multibillion-
dollar companies over the will of the American people.
  Congress, unfortunately, has not stood up to his despotic actions.
  He is not listening to Congress or to the American people. He has 
threatened military action against Greenland, Colombia, Cuba, Mexico, 
and Panama; and he has threatened to keep sidestepping Congress if you 
will let him.
  At a time when Americans are struggling to pay for rent, groceries, 
and childcare, they don't want us to spend billions in Venezuela. They 
would rather we spend that money here.
  But somebody is getting rich.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Speaker, Donald Trump has set up offshore 
bank accounts in Qatar outside the U.S. system, and only he knows where 
the money is going.
  There is a $500 million slush fund that the President is controlling 
right now. We are not going to benefit from that.
  Now, I ask my colleagues who have not joined us: How long will you 
stand by and be on the sidelines of the most consequential decision a 
country can make, to go to war?
  Are we a Congress or are we cowards?
  Will you stand up for the American people, and do what is right?
  Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, it is always a laughable argument when 
Democrats try to say the President is enriching himself.
  Just as one example, in this case you don't see him collecting a $50 
million bounty for bringing in Nicolas Maduro, a bounty that the 
previous administration agreed with, because he is never in it for the 
money. He is in it for America every single time.
  I would encourage them to talk to their colleague, Ms. Wasserman 
Schultz, and ask her if things are better or worse for Venezuelans 
today than they were under Maduro.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Fine).

                              {time}  1510

  Mr. FINE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time.
  My friend, the chairman, referred to stupidity in debating this 
resolution. I would like to talk about hypocrisy and illiteracy. Ten 
days before Joe Biden left office, he raised the bounty on Nicolas 
Maduro to $25 million. Now, I don't know if my Democratic colleagues 
thought that he would go: Wow, $25 million, maybe I should just turn 
myself in.
  I would like to believe that when they put that bounty out there they 
actually believed he should be removed from office.
  There is an old Twitter post from President Biden that said: ``Trump 
talks tough on Venezuela, but admires thugs and dictators like Nicolas 
Maduro.''
  Guess what, Mr. Speaker.
  I think President Trump showed in actions, not words, that he was 
determined to remove a drug lord, and that is what Nicolas Maduro was, 
from power.
  The President doesn't have to let us know every time they go and 
arrest somebody who has broken the law. That is exactly what happened 
here.
  Now I want to talk about illiteracy. My friend, the chairman, talked 
about people not understanding what is in the resolution. Before I got 
to Congress, I used to complain about really long bills that no one 
read before they voted on them. Well, this one is six lines long, and 
it doesn't talk about things like my colleague spoke about like 
escalation. This resolution deals with escalation.
  That is not what it does. It is six lines, and two of them say this: 
``Congress hereby directs the President to remove United States Armed 
Forces from Venezuela . . . ''
  There aren't any there.
  They proposed to have us vote on something that is irrelevant because 
the action they want to stop is not taking place. There is no war there 
now.
  I think what my colleagues are is shell-shocked because after all of 
these years of empty comments condemning Maduro, empty statements by 
them, empty statements by Joe Biden talking about how bad of a man he 
was, we finally have a President who actually went and did something 
about it.
  That is what President Trump did. We should be proud. We should be 
thanking him. We should be supporting him for what he did, and we 
should be voting down this resolution.

[[Page H1323]]

  

  Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I just wonder what kind of man, when a woman 
earned the Nobel Peace Prize, Maria Corina Machado, said that he wanted 
it, and she, trying to fight for democracy, came in, and he took it. He 
didn't earn it.
  What kind of man does that?
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Panetta).
  Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Speaker, the military intervention in Venezuela left 
us with uncertainty, instability, and insecurity. As a veteran, I 
commend the military operation to remove Maduro on January 3, but as an 
American, it left uncertainty for the day after. By replacing one 
despot with another, we are uncertain as to the government, to the oil, 
to the cartels, and to the future of democracy in Venezuela.
  This type of military adventurism can also create instability not 
just in Venezuela, but in the region, and that creates insecurity for 
the United States.
  As we saw this week about Greenland, the President wants spheres of 
influence rather than stability from a rules-based order. Instead of 
standing up to China and Russia, the President just wants to impress 
them by acting like them, rather than being better than them.
  That is what happens when we have a President that doesn't just want 
his own sphere of influence, he wants his own sphere of governance, 
especially when it comes to putting boots on the ground.
  This War Powers Resolution would not only prevent that in Venezuela 
without further congressional approval, it will also demonstrate that 
this Congress can actually act like a coequal branch of government and 
fulfill our responsibilities under the United States Constitution.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kentucky (Mr. Massie).
  Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this War Powers 
Resolution because the integrity of this institution is in question.
  Every Member of this House has a duty to uphold the Constitution's 
system of checks and balances by exercising its Article I powers 
entrusted to us.
  The executive's military exercise to capture the leader of Venezuela 
represents one of the most blatant usurpations of congressional 
authority we have seen in modern times. If we ignore it, then we are 
not merely acquiescing to executive overreach, we are rendering 
impotent our branch of government.
  Thomas Paine said in 1776: ``A long habit of not thinking a thing 
wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right.''
  Some of my Republican colleagues may feel obligated to acquiesce 
because it is our party occupying the White House. It is our party who 
is the Commander in Chief, but the precedents we tolerate today will 
inevitably be used against us tomorrow when the reins of power change 
hands. That is precisely why our loyalty must be to the Constitution 
and not to any party.
  If our country wants war, then Congress must vote on it. We are the 
voice of the people. There is a reason so many of our offices bear a 
Prisoner of War/Missing in Action Flag. It is a solemn reminder of the 
human cost of war and our obligation, not the obligation of a single 
executive or a private circle of special interests, to decide when to 
go to war.
  Even the executive branch knows that Congress had the authority, not 
them.
  Do you remember the night of the invasion, Mr. Speaker?
  It was the Attorney General who explained this was just a law 
enforcement action that the military was merely assisting.
  That is the problem we have because then it became obvious that we 
were undertaking a military exercise. If the unilateral use of force 
was not enough, then the executive has compounded this abuse by seizing 
Venezuela's oil revenues, selling them, and depositing that money in 
U.S. Treasury-controlled accounts overseas.

  So now the executive presumes the authority to appropriate money. 
That is a direct violation of the U.S. Constitution. Article I, Section 
9, Clause 7 of the Constitution is unambiguous: ``No money shall be 
drawn from the Treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by 
law . . . ''
  There was no law, and there has been no law to appropriate this money 
that was seized in an act of war.
  If we allow an executive to seize foreign resources and direct 
spending from pillaged accounts without congressional authorization, 
then people no longer have a voice in their government, and Congress' 
power of the purse becomes moot.
  If the executive believes war is justified, then let Congress declare 
it. If the executive believes foreign assets may be seized, spent, and 
appropriated, then let Congress appropriate them. That is how a 
Republic functions.
  Mr. MAST. My colleague is still not talking about the six lines of 
the resolution that says to remove forces from Venezuela. They are not 
talking about it because there are no forces in Venezuela.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Steube).
  Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution 
because it is nothing more than a weak and pointless attempt to attack 
our President and undermine our national security.
  We conducted a 40-minute operation to remove a drug-trafficking 
narcoterrorist, and Democrats are acting like we started world war III.
  For that brief, targeted action, they now insist Congress must step 
in and tie the President's hands.
  Let's be clear about how ridiculous this resolution truly is. It 
orders the United States to withdraw forces from Venezuela, yet there 
are no U.S. forces in Venezuela to withdraw. You cannot remove troops 
that don't even exist. That alone shows how unserious Democrats are in 
this effort.
  They also claim the act to remove Maduro was unconstitutional, which 
ignores Article II and decades of bipartisan precedent where Presidents 
have undertaken limited military action without a declaration of war.
  Clinton acted in Kosovo. Obama acted in Libya. Most similarly, George 
H.W. Bush captured drug-trafficker Manuel Noriega back in 1990. No one 
screamed constitutional crisis then. In fact, those acts were 
celebrated by both sides, and they were upheld by Federal courts.
  The bottom line is that Nicolas Maduro is a criminal defendant 
charged by the United States Department of Justice for narcoterrorism 
and drug-trafficking offenses, including conspiring to import cocaine 
into the United States and related weapon charges. He has run his 
regime like a cartel: flooding our country with poison and destroying 
American lives.
  This was not an act of war. It was an act of law enforcement. This 
resolution does nothing to protect the Constitution, nothing to make 
America safer, and nothing to stop the drugs killing our communities.
  It should be rejected.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

                              {time}  1520

  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, oil over democracy. Trump has made clear 
his priorities, accepting ruthless suppression by Maduro's comrades so 
long as the oil profits flow to him as the self-described acting 
President of Venezuela.
  With one major oil company describing the country as uninvestable, 
Trump has absolutely no winning strategy to secure any benefits for the 
American people.
  He doesn't just want to be king of America. He wants to be king of 
the universe. He wants to be a Putin or a Xi, disrupting the global 
order that bipartisan American leaders made possible to prevent another 
world war.
  Imperialism, starting wars around the world wherever Trump's latest 
whim takes him, will not Make America Great Again. It will make us much 
less safe.
  To found this country, Americans got rid of one despotic king. We 
don't need another one. Instead, we must demand an accountable 
President by adopting this important resolution and asserting the power 
of Congress.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kennedy of Utah). Members are reminded 
to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
  Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, I remind my colleague that President Trump has

[[Page H1324]]

yet to start any war in either administration. His fight every day is 
protect the American homeland, protect the people of the United States 
of America, and he has done a damn good job.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I am ready to close, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
close.
  Mr. Speaker, I have still not gotten an answer to the only question 
that matters today: Why did we strike Venezuela, spending taxpayer 
money and putting American troops in harm's way to replace Maduro with 
his own Vice President, someone who is an illegitimate ruler who is 
just as ruthless and evil as Maduro?
  I don't know why we did that. What was the point? Not a single one of 
my colleagues can answer that question because they have no answer. 
They know voting for this resolution is right.
  If people want to put our troops in harm's way, if they genuinely 
believe more military action may be necessary in the future, if that is 
what you believe, whether to defend oil fields or to do something else, 
then you shouldn't just pound the damn lectern and wave the flag. You 
need to come before this entire Chamber to move a bill to authorize the 
use of military force.
  My friends should have the guts and backbone to put an Authorization 
for Use of Military Force on the floor. Spell out the mission. Spell 
out the objectives. Tell the American people how long it lasts, what it 
costs, why it matters, and how we get a legitimate, democratic 
government in Venezuela. Have the guts to vote. That is all this 
resolution is requiring, but don't give me this bs about how before the 
strikes it was premature to vote, and now it is too late.
  I have seen this movie before, Mr. Speaker. It always starts with the 
White House telling us that it will be quick, clean, and over in a 
matter of days. Then, months later, years later, you get troops 
deployed, kids coming home in caskets, and taxpayers paying for endless 
quagmires that never end, and the same people here on the floor telling 
us that we are premature or crying wolf are suddenly nowhere to be 
found.
  That is the truth, Mr. Speaker. Wars are easy to start, but they are 
hard as hell to stop.
  This resolution ought to pass no matter what you believe about 
further military involvement in Venezuela. What it says plainly is that 
if the President is contemplating further military action, then he has 
a moral and a constitutional obligation to come here and get our 
approval.
  The people we represent did not send us here to be potted plants 
while the White House sleepwalks us into another mess. If this 
administration wants to escalate, make the case to the American people. 
Get consent through their elected Representatives. Follow the 
Constitution.
  Let me tell you what I think. I think this was all so that Donald 
Trump could get a good headline. I think it was so he could distract 
from the lousy economy and the fact that he is still covering up the 
Epstein files. I think it is about theft because the oil being taken 
from the people of Venezuela is being sold off and used to finance a 
slush fund in Qatar controlled by, you guessed it, Donald Trump.
  I don't think I have ever seen such a brazen example of corruption in 
my life. The President of the United States put American troops in 
harm's way so he could steal oil from Venezuela and deposit it into his 
own pocket. I think it is a disgraceful thing to do.
  It is time for my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to grow a 
spine, obey their oath, and do their damn jobs. You should vote ``yes'' 
on this resolution, whether you support President Trump's actions or 
you disagree with them.
  All this says is simply that if he wants to expand military 
operations, he has to come to Congress. It is that simple. It is not 
complicated. This is about the Constitution. This is about our oath. 
This is about representing the people who sent us here. I mean, to do 
anything less is a dereliction of our duty.
  I can't even believe that this is controversial, the idea that 
somehow we don't want to vote on whether to authorize the use of 
military force, whether it is in Venezuela or anywhere else.
  What is wrong with my colleagues who think this is such a big leap 
that this is somehow not justified? Read the Constitution.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from 
engaging in personalities toward the President.
  Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The last time I was on this floor, I had a question, and I still have 
that same question. I heard Members on the other side talk about the 
President trying to protect the American people. In fact, I heard 
someone--and I understand why Nicolas Maduro was indicted.
  I am going to ask the chairman again. I don't know whether he wants 
to answer this question, but if that is true, why did the President of 
the United States pardon a former leader of Honduras, the former 
President, who was convicted of drug trafficking, who bragged about 
shoving drugs up the noses of the gringos? Why did the President of the 
United States pardon him?
  I yield to the gentleman from Florida to respond to my question.
  Mr. MAST. The President never explained it to me. Maybe he was just 
trying to make room for Maduro and his wife.
  Mr. MEEKS. Reclaiming my time, yeah, okay, that is funny. It is 
because he does not care. It never was about drugs. It was always about 
oil. That is why. He doesn't care. That is why he took the Nobel Peace 
Prize from someone else who earned it. He doesn't care. He cares about 
one person--himself--and enriching his family and his friends.
  Mr. Speaker, this War Powers Resolution introduced by Representative 
McGovern would put an immediate end to this administration's reckless 
military interventions in Venezuela. We cannot allow the Constitution 
to be usurped by one President who believes he can unilaterally declare 
war, invade a sovereign nation, and buck the rules-based international 
system we helped build.
  If the House fails to check President Trump's aggression today, it 
will not end in Venezuela. I know the White House is paying close 
attention to this vote, and if we don't stand now and reassert our 
Article I power over matters of war and peace, we will have abdicated 
one of our most solemn responsibilities and reduced ourselves to a 
rubberstamp and become no better than the Duma in Russia.
  Our constituents sent us here to lower their costs, not to sit on our 
hands while the President keeps doing what he pleases. Let us make sure 
we pass this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MAST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Let me answer some of the questions that my colleagues put up.
  Why did President Trump take Maduro? It was to protect the homeland 
of the United States of America, as he has done with action after 
action after action. It is the same reason that two Presidents put a 
warrant, a bounty, on Nicolas Maduro--not just President Trump, but 
also President Biden. That is why Nicolas Maduro was snatched up, 
because of his poisoning of the people of the United States of America.
  Again, something can be true and also be true about another action 
and another action and another action. It was because of the bounty. It 
was because of the warrant. It was because of the drugs that he was 
bringing to the United States of America. It was because of his 
partnership with China, Iran, and Russia, to be their foothold in the 
Western Hemisphere for their nefarious activities. It was because of 
the illegal shipments of oil that they were moving on Russian ships to 
China that were coming out of Venezuela. It was because of a lot of 
things that this took place.
  Does the President have a plan for the future? He does, 100 percent: 
free and fair elections, freedom for the people of Venezuela. Ask the 
people of Venezuela if that is what they want. Ask the people of 
Venezuela if they are better today than they were before

[[Page H1325]]

President Trump snatched up Maduro. They will tell you they are. They 
are more free today, and they are hoping for more and more freedom each 
and every day.
  President Trump has brought hope to our homeland by protecting this 
homeland that has been ignored for so long. He has brought hope to so 
many others around the globe, the people of Venezuela, people across 
the Middle East, people across Europe, people in place after place 
because of his actions.

                              {time}  1530

  He is the peace President. He has proven it over and over again. He 
has never been the President of forever wars. He has yet to create one. 
He has only worked in limited operations that protect the homeland of 
the United States of America and done the best job of it in the history 
of the United States of America.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired. Pursuant to 
the order of the House of January 21, 2026, the previous question is 
ordered on the concurrent resolution.
  The question is on adoption of the concurrent resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question are postponed.

                          ____________________