In Washington, political fights are common. But when the debate centers on military action and the safety of American troops, the stakes become far higher. That’s exactly what unfolded during a recent vote in Congress over the War Powers Resolution, a measure that would have limited the president’s authority during ongoing military operations. The proposal ultimately failed—but the debate surrounding it revealed just how divided Washington remains over national security decisions.
In a recent episode of Breaking Battlegrounds, hosts Chuck Warren and Sam Stone spoke with Pat Harrigan about the vote, the politics surrounding it, and what it could mean for American troops and the country’s strategic interests abroad. Harrigan, a decorated former Green Beret and West Point graduate, offered a blunt assessment: national security should never become a partisan fight.
The War Powers Debate
The vote in question centered on the War Powers Resolution, a law designed to limit presidential authority to engage in military conflict without congressional approval. Under the existing framework, the president has a 60-day window after initiating military action to continue operations before Congress must formally authorize them. Critics of the administration argued that the resolution was necessary to reassert congressional oversight. But Harrigan sees it differently.
According to him, attempting to restrict the president’s authority in the middle of ongoing operations risks sending the wrong message—both to adversaries and to American service members deployed overseas. His view is straightforward: once military operations begin, the focus should shift to ensuring success and protecting the troops carrying out the mission.
“There’s No Republican or Democrat—There’s Just Winning”
During the conversation, Harrigan emphasized what he believes should be the guiding principle during wartime decisions. When American forces are deployed, he argues, political divisions should take a back seat.
“There’s not Republican, there’s not Democrat,” Harrigan said. “There’s just winning.”
From his perspective, the most important responsibility of lawmakers during active operations is ensuring that troops have the support and resources they need to complete their mission and return home safely. Debates about policy and strategy can—and should—happen later. But during the mission itself, Harrigan believes unity is essential.
Frustration Over Political Divisions
Harrigan also expressed frustration that the War Powers vote became such a contentious political battle. In his view, bringing the issue to the floor during ongoing military activity created unnecessary division at a moment when the country should be focused on strategic success. He argued that lawmakers should avoid actions that could undermine confidence among American troops or signal disunity to adversaries abroad. The timing of the debate, he said, was particularly troubling.
When Veterans in Congress Disagree
One of the more striking parts of the conversation came when the hosts asked Harrigan about disagreements among veterans serving in Congress. Historically, lawmakers with military backgrounds have often worked together across party lines on national security issues. But Harrigan believes that sense of unity is beginning to erode. For him, that shift is especially concerning because veterans understand firsthand the consequences of political decisions made in Washington.
Those decisions can affect everything from strategy and resources to the safety of the men and women deployed overseas. According to Harrigan, veterans in Congress have a responsibility to bring perspective and leadership to those debates—putting the country’s strategic interests above partisan conflict.
A Moment That Reflects a Larger Divide
The War Powers debate may have been just one vote in Congress, but it reflects a larger reality about modern American politics. Even issues involving military operations and national security are increasingly drawn into partisan battles. For Harrigan, that trend represents a troubling shift. If lawmakers cannot find common ground when American troops are involved, he argues, the consequences could extend far beyond Washington.
Listen to the Full Conversation
The discussion between Chuck Warren, Sam Stone, and Congressman Pat Harrigan offers a deeper look into the debate over presidential authority, congressional oversight, and the role politics plays during military conflict. It’s a conversation that highlights the difficult balance between democratic accountability and the need for unity when American forces are in harm’s way. For anyone interested in national security, military policy, or the inner workings of Congress, the full episode of Breaking Battlegrounds provides a compelling window into that debate.
Transcript
Chuck Warren: Okay, War Power Resolution Act went down in defeat. You had four or five Democrats come over. The funny thing is about the media, gentlemen, is that they would say this is a bipartisan vote defending Trump’s actions, but we did not get that today in the headlines. Do the Democrats just want us to lose? I guess I’ll just throw the total political rhetoric out there.
I just find this very odd for a group of people who have moaned and groaned about Iran for 40 years and now all of sudden we’re taking it to them and getting rid of this evil regime. They are truly evil. I want to punch anybody in the nose who says they’re not. What did you hear on the floor that surprised you or just didn’t surprise you at all?
Congressman Pat Harrigan: It doesn’t surprise me. Again, this is another one of those things. It’s just not surprising because our Democratic colleagues have been far more adamant about playing politics this year than they have been about actually pursuing national security. And that’s just a reality. So I also agree with you. I think everybody agrees that’s listening to this. There is no reason that you would take the authority away from the President to do what he’s doing right now in the middle of an action. Once the President says go, look guys, it’s go time. And the only thing that there is, there’s not Republican, there’s not Democrat, there’s just winning.
And there’s just making sure that our troops have what they need in order to be successful over there and then come back home alive. That’s the only thing that we should be talking about at this juncture. Now, you know, 60 days from now, that’s a different story. But right now, this was irresponsible by the Democrats. I really am frustrated that they even brought it up.
Chuck Warren: Yes.
Congressman Pat Harrigan: And look, we’ve got to understand that the President has done nothing wrong here. He’s complied with the war powers resolution. He’s followed the law and until that changes or until that current structure expires. Because he’s got 60 days from the beginning of hostilities to do it. We should not be having this conversation.
Sam Stone: Congressman one of the things being here in Arizona that I know has been bothering both Chuck and I is that our two US senators Both Ruben Gallego and Mark Kelly both have military experience yet. They’ve been jumping in on the the bandwagon against Trump and on this War Powers Resolution. Is it, it, as a veteran, does it bother you more when your colleagues who should know better from their time in uniform play politics like this?
**Congressman Pat Harrigan: **Yes, it does. And it’s actually incredibly concerning to me. And I’ll tell you, there is a network of veterans in Congress that has historically had some really good cohesion together. Primarily because we all see the bigger picture and we’re able to put country above party. And that is critically important for consistency in our government. That is eroding right before our eyes and whether it was, you know, kind of the so-called seditious six really going out and doing something that was at best incredibly irresponsible for the country, for our service members.
You know, at worst, something worse than that, but at best, irresponsible. There’s a lot of irresponsibility going on. And where I have a lot of sadness around this is because military veterans should be able to actually understand the consequences of the decisions that we’re making and how that practically has an impact, not just on our national security, but on our troops. And so it’s incumbent upon us to actually be the adults in the room and be the leaders and work together in order to achieve the strategic interests of the United States of America.
That’s not happening right now and it’s really sad to see. It’s also a sad state of affairs for our country.
Listen to the full episode of Breaking Battlegrounds anywhere you stream your podcasts!