A push by progressive Democrats to cut off funding for the Iran war is hitting resistance from senior members of the party, who question whether the strategy would stop the fighting or simply hand Republicans a political victory.
With government funding set to expire Dec. 11, some Democrats want to deny support for the next stopgap funding bill unless it bars the administration from spending federal dollars on military operations against Iran.
The proposal, championed by Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland), Rep. Ro Khanna (D-California) and others has divided Democrats as they scramble for ways to restrict Trump’s ability to continue the war. Moderates and even some progressives are skeptical about risking a shutdown just weeks before Democrats take control of Congress in January.
“I want the war to end,” said Washington Rep. Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee. “Would shutting down the government make that more likely, or would it just hand the Republicans a political victory while the war continues? That’s the basic debate we’re having.”
Trending
President Donald Trump, Smith pointed out, has already been financing the war without a specific appropriation for the conflict, relying instead on existing Pentagon funding. Refusing to approve additional spending would not necessarily stop military operations.
Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee, warned against risking a shutdown, arguing that Democrats could instead send a message by rejecting the administration’s supplemental spending request and proposed reconciliation package.
“I do not think we should have a government shutdown,” he told The Washington Sun. “We are going to defeat the administration’s efforts at reconciliation and a supplemental. That’s a pretty strong signal that they’re not getting the money they’re asking for the war and for [defense] modernization.”
A shutdown, Coons warned, “would divert us from our core objectives for weeks, if not months.”
Democrats face a choice between an immediate confrontation and postponing the fight until January. But even under Democratic control of Congress, Trump will retain veto power, and Republicans could filibuster most Senate legislation.
Washington Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, and Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, have said they favor a short-term funding extension.
Neither would commit to demanding Iran war restrictions as a condition of supporting a December funding extension, with Murray saying Democrats are examining their options.
“We are not going to accept their supplemental funding that funds the war,” Murray said. “We’re not going to accept their reconciliation that they are talking about that they might do.”
DeLauro said there wasn’t enough time to complete the defense spending bill before the end of the year, saying that Democrats ultimately “are not going to provide the billions of dollars that the administration is looking for for defense.”
Democrats are considering a range of possible demands in negotiations over the continuing resolution. Those include prohibiting additional funding for the war through a supplemental spending bill or the CR itself, restricting the transfer of existing funds to the Pentagon and barring funding for ground troops.
Former House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland), who spent two decades in Democratic leadership and is retiring from Congress, also warned against a showdown that could disrupt government services just two weeks before Christmas.
“I think it’s not a good tactic,” Hoyer told The Sun. “Why would we want to shut down government when we’re going to be in charge?”
Hoyer argued that Democrats should wait until they control both chambers in January, when they can advance their own proposals.
“Why create that trauma for our government and for the people it serves?” he said. “If you want to have that fight over a CR, have that fight when you’re in the majority.”
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Virginia) also questioned the wisdom of risking a shutdown, particularly given his state’s large population of federal workers.
“I’m open to hearing more on the debate, but another government shutdown over the holidays, especially for states with as many employees as we’ve got?” Warner told The Sun.
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wisconsin), a progressive member of the House Appropriations Committee, cautioned against committing to a showdown over a continuing resolution before Democrats know what funding legislation Republicans plan to pursue.
“There may be easier and better ways to do the exact same thing,” Pocan said, suggesting that the restrictions on the war could instead be included in a separate defense spending bill.
“I think there’s a lot of people having debates like you have in debate club that maybe aren’t impacting reality right now on this issue,” Pocan said.
But proponents say Democrats have a mandate to act now, arguing that opposition to the war helped propel their victory in last week’s midterm elections.
Khanna said that Tuesday’s failed effort to impeach Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has increased the urgency for bold Democratic action.
“We have to be firmer on being an anti-war party,” Khanna told The Sun. “Be very clear that we’re going to cut the Pentagon budget, we’re going to stop the war in Iran, that we’re going to be willing to cut off aid for Israel.”
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Virginia) argued that Congress must use the power of the purse to stop military operations that Trump has continued despite repeated congressional efforts to rein him in.
“We can let the president decide if ‘Wow, all government is funded, but I really want to keep bombing schools and civilian water infrastructure in Iran, so I’m not going to fund the government,’” Kaine said. “It wouldn’t be us shutting the government down. We’ll be funding the government, the legal parts of government, just not an illegal war.”
Authors
Contributor
