March 16–17, 2026 — Washington, D.C. — Day 17 of Operation Epic Fury
In a remarkable act of bipartisan self-criticism, Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) stepped onto CNN's State of the Union Sunday morning and did something few politicians ever do: he blamed his own party. Both parties, he said, have been "feckless" in allowing presidential war powers to grow unchecked for decades — and now, with the United States in its 17th day of an undeclared war against Iran, Congress is "just laying down and doing nothing" while a president spends a billion dollars a day of taxpayer money without a single congressional vote. His warning was stark: if Congress does not act now, Trump will feel free to attack Cuba and North Korea next.
The CNN Moment: 'Both Parties Have Been Feckless'
Appearing on CNN's State of the Union with anchor Jake Tapper, Booker did not begin with an attack on Republicans — he began with a confession about his own party.
"Well, listen, I'm going to be one of those Democrats that say I think both parties have been feckless in allowing the growth of the power of the presidency," Booker told Tapper.
The New Jersey senator was careful to put the current moment in historical context — drawing a sharp distinction between past presidential overreach and what he sees as an entirely different category of executive action.
"Nothing Obama did, nothing Trump did even in his first term are in any way related to what we're seeing right now — the biggest military engagement of our country since the war in Afghanistan," Booker said.
He then turned the focus to the present — and his anger was unmistakable:
"So I understand past presidents have drifted and taken power from the Article 1 branch of government. But at this scale, at this magnitude, at this cost — why is Congress just laying down and doing nothing?"
The Constitutional Argument: Article I vs. Executive Overreach
Booker's argument rests on a foundational constitutional principle that has been eroding for decades across both Republican and Democratic administrations: the War Powers Clause.
Under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, the power to declare war belongs exclusively to Congress — not the president. The president, as Commander-in-Chief under Article II, has the authority to direct military forces once war is declared or in response to an imminent attack — but the decision to initiate a major military campaign has traditionally required congressional authorization.
That tradition has been progressively hollowed out since the 1973 War Powers Resolution, which itself was a response to presidential overreach in Vietnam and requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing U.S. forces to hostilities, and to withdraw those forces within 60 days unless Congress authorizes the action. In practice, presidents of both parties have routinely ignored or worked around the resolution.
Trump has not sought congressional approval for attacking Iran, and Republicans in Congress have so far side-stepped public debate over the war, even as Senate Democrats reach for every tool at their disposal to demand hearings.
Booker argued the Iran war — now in its 17th day with 13 Americans killed, billions spent, and a full regional conflict engulfing 11 countries — represents a threshold that demands a congressional response unlike anything in recent memory.
"We've had no oversight whatsoever over what the executive is doing as we're spending a billion dollars a day, and we have failed to have any real substantive debate or discussion," Booker said.
The Slippery Slope Warning: 'Cuba Next, Then North Korea'
Booker's most alarming argument was not about Iran itself — it was about what comes after Iran if Congress fails to act.
"Because, if we allow this to happen, then we give Trump the permission to say, 'OK, finished with Venezuela, I went to Iran, now I'm going to go to Cuba, now I'm going to go to North Korea.'"
He added: "It is outrageous and never conceived of that we could have this level of a military engagement without the people's house, Congress, doing something about it."
The warning is not hypothetical. Trump has already ordered military strikes on Nigeria, Venezuela, and Iran since Christmas — three countries in less than three months, none with explicit congressional authorization. A handful of party members in the upper chamber have already filed a resolution seeking to block Trump from military intervention in Cuba, which could come to a vote within weeks.
Booker's concern is that without a firm congressional pushback now — while the Iran war is still raging — the precedent will be set for an essentially unchecked presidential war-making power with global reach.
The Hormuz Warning: 'The Biggest Gumming Up of Oil Markets We've Ever Seen'
Booker also pointed to the economic consequences of the war — specifically the closure of the Strait of Hormuz — as evidence that Congress cannot afford to stay silent.
"Literally, you see with what's going on in the Strait of Hormuz right now as the biggest gumming up of the oil markets we have ever seen," Booker told Tapper.
He warned that the spiraling conflict had strategic consequences beyond oil prices: "The consequences strategically for us moving so many assets in the region means that we're endangering the assets we have necessarily and potentially in other areas."
The Strait of Hormuz has been effectively closed since March 3 — with shipping traffic down approximately 90%, approximately 1,000 tankers stranded, crude oil at $105 per barrel, and U.S. gas prices up 26% in just 16 days.
What Democrats Have Actually Done — And Failed to Do
Booker's criticism of his own party comes with important context. Senate Democrats have not been entirely passive — but their efforts have fallen short:
- 📅 February 28: Booker issued a formal statement criticizing the Iran strikes as unconstitutional, saying Trump acted "without Congressional approval and in a manner that threatens national and regional stability."
- 📅 March 9: Senate Democrats forced a vote on a War Powers Resolution to block Trump from continuing military action in Iran — it failed 47–53, largely along party lines
- 📅 March 9: House Democrats put forward a similar measure — it also failed without Republican support
- 📅 March 10: Booker announced Democrats had "collectively agreed" to use procedural mechanisms to block Senate legislative business until Trump officials agree to testify under oath about the war
- 📅 March 10: Booker told reporters: "Each individual senator has a tremendous amount of power to disrupt the normal functioning of the Senate, as well as certain privileges that we can exercise."
- 📅 March 16: Democrats continue demanding public hearings — Republicans continue refusing
Booker's "feckless" charge appears directed not just at the failed war powers votes — but at the broader decades-long pattern of congressional deference to executive military action that made those failures possible.
The Republican Response: 'We're Conducting Generous Oversight'
Republican leaders have pushed back on the Democratic demands — arguing that existing oversight mechanisms are sufficient and that public hearings on an active military conflict could compromise national security.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters last week that he didn't expect public hearings specifically on the Iran war, but noted it would inevitably come up in the regular rhythm of testimony on military policy and spending.
Thune also noted there had been regular news conferences from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Gen. Dan Caine, arguing they were "answering the hard questions that are being asked."
Sen. Roger Wicker, the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, argued that the regular run of hearings on Capitol Hill would provide lawmakers with plentiful opportunities to ask questions, saying: "We're going to conduct generous oversight, thorough oversight."
The GOP chairs of all national security-related committees have said they have no plans to hold hearings specifically focused on the Iran war in the near term — a position Democrats call an abdication of constitutional responsibility.
The Bipartisan Dissent: Republicans Who Agree With Booker
While most Republicans have stayed loyal to Trump on the Iran war, a small but significant group of GOP lawmakers have broken ranks — effectively agreeing with Booker's core constitutional argument even if they won't use his language:
- 🔴 Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) — Has been the most consistent Republican critic, arguing the war is unconstitutional and that Congress must vote
- 🔴 Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) — Announced his disapproval and called for a congressional vote
- 🔴 Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH) — Called for congressional authorization
- 🔴 Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) — Turned against the war, saying Trump and the administration campaigned on "No More Foreign Wars" and reneged on that promise
- 🔴 Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) — Pushed back against FCC Chair Brendan Carr's threats to revoke broadcast licenses, saying he's "not in favor of government meddling in freedom of speech"
This bipartisan constitutional unease — stretching from Booker on the Democratic left to Paul and Massie on the libertarian right — represents the most significant congressional challenge to presidential war powers in a generation.
The War Powers Act: What It Says and Why It Hasn't Worked
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 — passed over President Nixon's veto during the Vietnam War — was designed to prevent exactly the kind of presidential unilateralism that Booker is now decrying. It requires the president to:
- Notify Congress within 48 hours of committing U.S. forces to hostilities
- Withdraw those forces within 60 days unless Congress passes a formal declaration of war or specific authorization
- Allow Congress to force withdrawal at any time through a concurrent resolution (not requiring a presidential signature)
In practice, no president since 1973 — Democratic or Republican — has acknowledged the War Powers Resolution as a binding constraint on their authority. Every president has either argued their specific action fell outside the resolution's scope, submitted a "consistent with but not pursuant to" notification, or simply ignored the 60-day clock.
The failed Senate war powers vote on March 9 — 47–53 — was the closest Congress has come to invoking the resolution's authority in the Iran conflict. It was not close enough.
Booker's Bigger Picture: A Senate That Has 'Failed'
What made Booker's CNN appearance particularly striking was his willingness to indict the institutional Senate itself — not just the Republicans who voted against the war powers resolution, but the entire culture of congressional deference that has made such votes futile.
His language was unusually candid for a sitting senator:
- "Both parties have been feckless in allowing the growth of the power of the presidency."
- "We've had no oversight whatsoever."
- "We have failed to have any real substantive debate or discussion."
- "Why is Congress just laying down and doing nothing?"
The word "feckless" — meaning lacking initiative or strength — is rarely used by politicians about their own institution. Its deployment here reflects Booker's frustration not just with Republican obstruction, but with the broader passivity of a legislative branch that has spent decades voluntarily surrendering its constitutional powers to the executive.
What Happens If Congress Stays Silent?
Booker's warning about Cuba and North Korea is grounded in a real precedent concern. If the Iran war is allowed to proceed indefinitely without congressional authorization — at a cost of $1 billion per day, with 13 Americans dead and no exit strategy publicly articulated — it will establish a new baseline for presidential war-making authority.
Future presidents — of either party — will point to the Iran war as proof that major military campaigns do not require congressional approval, even when they cost trillions, kill thousands, and transform global energy markets.
That is the precedent Booker is fighting to prevent. Whether Congress — and specifically the 53 senators who voted against the war powers resolution — will ultimately act before the 60-day War Powers clock runs out remains the central unanswered question of the Iran war's political aftermath.
Key Quotes
- 🗣️ Booker (CNN): "Both parties have been feckless in allowing the growth of the power of the presidency."
- 🗣️ Booker (CNN): "At this scale, at this magnitude, at this cost — why is Congress just laying down and doing nothing?"
- 🗣️ Booker (CNN): "If we allow this to happen, we give Trump permission to go to Cuba, North Korea — it is outrageous."
- 🗣️ Booker (AP): "We've had no oversight whatsoever. A billion dollars a day — and nothing."
- 🗣️ Thune (R-SD): "I don't expect public hearings specifically on the Iran war."
- 🗣️ Wicker (R-MS): "We're going to conduct generous oversight, thorough oversight."
- 🗣️ Booker (March 10): "Each individual senator has a tremendous amount of power to disrupt the normal functioning of the Senate."
Key Facts at a Glance
- 👤 Senator: Cory Booker (D-NJ) — Senate Foreign Relations Committee member
- 📺 Appearance: CNN State of the Union with Jake Tapper — Sunday March 15, 2026
- 📅 War start: February 28, 2026 — Day 17 on Monday March 16
- 🗳️ War Powers Resolution vote: Failed 47–53 (March 9, largely party-line)
- 💰 Daily war cost: ~$1 billion
- 💸 Total war cost (Day 15): $11.3 billion
- 🇺🇸 U.S. service members killed: 13
- 📜 Congressional authorization: None sought, none granted
- 🏛️ Republican position: No hearings specifically on Iran war planned
- 🔵 Democratic strategy: Procedural obstruction + testimony demands
- 🌍 Countries Trump has struck since Christmas: Nigeria, Venezuela, Iran
- ⚠️ Next warned targets: Cuba (resolution already filed), North Korea
📡 Sources: The Hill (March 15, 2026), CNN State of the Union transcript (March 15), AP/Boston Herald (March 16), Al Jazeera (March 10), Quiver Quantitative (February 28), Bozeman Daily Chronicle (AP, March 16).
🔄 Last updated: March 17, 2026.
🔖 Tags: Cory Booker, War Powers, Iran War Congress, Jake Tapper, CNN State of Union, Democrats Iran, Republican Iran Hearings, John Thune, Roger Wicker, Iran War 2026, Breaking News
0 Comments