To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.
- Bill Number
- H.Con.Res. 68
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- International Affairs
- Status
- Failed House
- Latest Action
- 2026-01-22: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Last Updated
- 2026-01-23T20:11:04Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 68) aims to enforce congressional authority over U.S. military deployments by directing the President to withdraw U.S. Armed Forces from Venezuela unless Congress has explicitly approved their presence through a declaration of war or specific legal authorization.
Key Provisions
- Invocation of Existing Law: The resolution cites Section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution (a 1973 law that limits the President's ability to commit U.S. forces to hostilities without congressional approval). This section requires the President to remove forces from unauthorized military actions within 60 days (or 90 days in some cases).
- Direct Order to Withdraw: Congress instructs the President to immediately remove all U.S. Armed Forces engaged in hostilities within or against Venezuela, effective unless overridden by a formal declaration of war or a specific statute authorizing military force.
- Scope: Applies only to deployments not already authorized by Congress; it does not address non-hostile or congressionally approved activities.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- No new laws are created; instead, the resolution reinforces and activates the War Powers Resolution by providing a specific congressional directive for Venezuela.
- It does not amend statutes but serves as a formal expression of Congress's intent, potentially triggering legal obligations under the 1973 law if the resolution passes both chambers.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The executive branch (including the President and Department of Defense) would face pressure to comply, possibly leading to rapid military redeployments and internal policy reviews on foreign engagements.
- On Citizens: U.S. citizens, particularly military personnel and their families, could see reduced risks from unauthorized operations; it might also affect taxpayers by limiting funding for unapproved missions.
- On International Relations: Could strain U.S.-Venezuela ties if forces are withdrawn abruptly, signal a shift in U.S. foreign policy toward non-intervention in the region, and influence alliances with Latin American countries or adversaries like Russia and China active in Venezuela.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- U.S. Congress: Gains reinforced oversight on military actions, with House members like Rep. McGovern and Rep. Massie as key sponsors.
- President and Executive Branch: Directly bound by the directive, potentially limiting unilateral foreign policy decisions.
- U.S. Military Personnel: Troops in or near Venezuela would be subject to withdrawal orders.
- Venezuelan Government and Citizens: Could experience reduced U.S. military pressure, affecting ongoing political and humanitarian dynamics.
- U.S. Taxpayers and Advocacy Groups: Impacts foreign aid, sanctions, and intervention debates, benefiting anti-war organizations.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: As a concurrent resolution, it requires House and Senate approval but lacks the full force of a binding law; however, under the War Powers Resolution, non-compliance could lead to lawsuits or funding cuts by Congress. It emphasizes the 60/90-day withdrawal clock for unauthorized actions.
- Constitutional: Highlights tensions in the separation of powers—Article I gives Congress war-declaring authority, while Article II vests the President as Commander-in-Chief—potentially setting a precedent for future congressional interventions in executive military decisions.
- Political: Introduced in the 119th Congress (2nd Session) on January 7, 2026, and referred to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, it reflects bipartisan concerns (sponsors from both parties) over unauthorized engagements, amid broader debates on U.S. interventionism in Latin America. If passed, it could spark partisan divides on national security and foreign policy.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. McGovern, James P. [D-MA-2]
Cosponsors (126)
Rep. Massie, Thomas [R-KY-4], Rep. Castro, Joaquin [D-TX-20], Rep. Ryan, Patrick [D-NY-18], Rep. Houlahan, Chrissy [D-PA-6], Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6], Rep. Panetta, Jimmy [D-CA-19], Rep. Goodlander, Maggie [D-NH-2], Rep. Crow, Jason [D-CO-6], Rep. Meeks, Gregory W. [D-NY-5], Rep. Smith, Adam [D-WA-9], Rep. Himes, James A. [D-CT-4], Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2], Rep. Leger Fernandez, Teresa [D-NM-3], Rep. Stansbury, Melanie A. [D-NM-1], Rep. Omar, Ilhan [D-MN-5], Rep. Ansari, Yassamin [D-AZ-3], Rep. Foushee, Valerie P. [D-NC-4], Rep. Larson, John B. [D-CT-1], Rep. Carter, Troy A. [D-LA-2], Rep. Auchincloss, Jake [D-MA-4], Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17], Rep. Moore, Gwen [D-WI-4], Rep. Velázquez, Nydia M. [D-NY-7], Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9], Rep. Pocan, Mark [D-WI-2], Rep. Scholten, Hillary J. [D-MI-3], Rep. Subramanyam, Suhas [D-VA-10], Rep. Kaptur, Marcy [D-OH-9], Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-12], Rep. Min, Dave [D-CA-47], Rep. Balint, Becca [D-VT-At Large], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Conaway, Herbert C. [D-NJ-3], Rep. Jacobs, Sara [D-CA-51], Rep. Ramirez, Delia C. [D-IL-3], Rep. Amo, Gabe [D-RI-1], Rep. McClellan, Jennifer L. [D-VA-4], Rep. Vargas, Juan [D-CA-52], Rep. Courtney, Joe [D-CT-2], Rep. Tonko, Paul [D-NY-20], Rep. Dean, Madeleine [D-PA-4], Rep. Foster, Bill [D-IL-11], Rep. Doggett, Lloyd [D-TX-37], Rep. Beatty, Joyce [D-OH-3], Rep. Cisneros, Gilbert Ray [D-CA-31], Rep. Bell, Wesley [D-MO-1], Rep. Trahan, Lori [D-MA-3], Rep. Simon, Lateefah [D-CA-12], Rep. Dexter, Maxine [D-OR-3], Rep. Vindman, Eugene Simon [D-VA-7] and 76 more
Recent Actions
- 2026-01-22: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- 2026-01-22: On agreeing to the resolution Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 215 - 215 (Roll no. 48). (Roll call 48)
- 2026-01-22: Failed of passage/not agreed to in House On agreeing to the resolution Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 215 - 215 (Roll no. 48). (Roll call 48)
- 2026-01-22: Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1334-1335)
- 2026-01-22: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.Con.Res. 68, the Chair put the question on agreeing to the resolution and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Mr. McGovern demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
- 2026-01-22: The previous question was ordered pursuant to a previous order of the House.
- 2026-01-22: DEBATE - Pursuant to a previous order, the House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Con. Res. 68.
- 2026-01-22: Considered pursuant to a previous order. (consideration: CR H1317-1325; text: CR H1317)
- 2026-01-22: Consideration initiated pursuant to a previous order.
- 2026-01-21: ORDER OF PROCEDURE - Mr. Mast asked unanimous consent that it be in order at any time to consider H. Con. Res. 68 in the House if called up by the Chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs or his designee; that the concurrent resolution be considered as read; and that the previous question be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution to adoption without intervening motion except for one hour of debate equally divided among and controlled by Representative Mast of Florida, Representative Meeks of New York, and Representative McGovern of Massachusetts, or their respective designees. Agreed to without objection.
- 2026-01-07: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
- 2026-01-07: Submitted in House
- 2026-01-07: Submitted in House
Bill Versions
- To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress. — issued 2026-01-07 — PDF (2 pages)