A handful of Republicans have joined Democrats in opposing the ongoing U.S. military operation against Iran, showing that members of the party may be viewing President Donald Trump’s war as a key vulnerability weeks out from the midterms. On Tuesday, the House voted 220-204 to limit U.S. military action against Iran, the third time it has approved the largely symbolic measure. This time, seven Republicans joined Democrats in the roll call vote, including three supporting the effort for the first time.
When approached for comment, a spokesperson for Thomas Massie pointed to the representative’s long history of opposing military efforts in Iran without congressional authorization, as well as the articles of impeachment filed against Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth over alleged violations of the War Powers Act. Meanwhile, Iowa Representative Zach Nunn was asked on Fox News about his shift on the resolution and replied that Congress “needs to have a stake in the game.” Mariannette Miller-Meeks of Iowa likewise voted for the resolution and argued that the Iranian intervention appeared to be becoming “another forever war.” The increased defections come amid growing concerns within GOP camps about the electoral consequences of the Iran war, and the remarks from Iowan members of Congress come as the Hawkeye State—which Trump carried by 13 points in 2024 and which has been reliably red in recent years—increasingly appears a battleground and a key target for Democrats come November. Newsweek reached out to the Republican lawmakers on Wednesday for comment.
The measure, which passed Tuesday, urges the removal of American soldiers from the region absent congressional authorization—a symbolic measure aimed at pressuring the White House and Senate but which does not have any immediate impact on the combat operations. The arguments offered by the two Iowan lawmakers echo concerns expressed by both parties as the Iran war—originally envisioned as a brief operation—extends past the six-month mark. Hegseth said that the congressman was “willing to take the tough votes to do the right thing on behalf of our war fighters,” as quoted in the Des Moines Register.
Miller-Meeks, meanwhile, said she would not vote to “to keep our soldiers in an open-ended war, with Iowans paying too much at the pump.” “The Iranian regime and its nuclear ambitions have been defanged,” she wrote on X. Analysis from the Cook Political Report shows that both campaigns—Nunn's bid for Iowa's 3rd Congressional District and Miller-Meeks’ for its 1st—are in “toss up” territory. With only three seats between Democrats and a majority in the House, the two districts are among the party’s top targets as potential flips that could help them secure control of Congress.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, its official campaign arm, identifies both seats as among the 58 that are “in play” come November. Also in Iowa, Representative Ashley Hinson has released an ad touting her pro-affordability policy priorities and her willingness to “reach across the aisle” and work with Democrats on issues like drug prices and health care for veterans. Hinson is locked in a close contest for one of the state’s Senate seats against the state Representative Josh Turek, though she and Randy Feenstra—another Iowa Republican—voted against curbing the president’s war powers on Tuesday.
And in the state’s gubernatorial race, several polls show the Democrat Rob Sand enjoying a double-digit lead over Zach Lahn. Iowa has not elected a Democrat as governor since 2006, but the state’s former assistant attorney general appears to be gathering momentum thanks to a campaign focused on government accountability, economic growth, and affordability. Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Ben Kelly and Sam Wilson.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
