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

On 2026-01-22, Representative Patrick Ryan (D-NY-18) delivered a floor speech titled "REMOVAL OF THE USE OF UNITED STATES FORCES FOR HOSTILITIES WITHIN OR AGAINST VENEZUELA" in the House. The speech addressed taxes and also covered foreign policy, defense. It referenced legislation including HR5670, HR8741, HRES1409.

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

Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 15 (Thursday, January 22, 2026) [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 clear

Referenced legislation: HRES1409, HR5670, HR8741, HCONRES68