For the 13th time this year, members of the Senate filed into the marbled chamber on Thursday to cast their votes on a Democratic measure calling on President Trump to halt military operations against Iran or seek authorization to continue waging war in the Middle East.
The resolution faltered when Republicans banded together to block it, surprising no one who has watched the same ritual unfold week after week as a conflict that was supposed to last four weeks has dragged into its sixth month.
It looked like an exercise in futility, not only because similar efforts have failed repeatedly — the vote was 50 to 49 on Thursday, similar to last week’s — but because one such resolution actually succeeded last month, winning approval in both the House and Senate only to have Mr. Trump ignore it completely.
Yet Democrats refuse to let the matter rest, viewing the successive votes as part of a broader political strategy to highlight the growing disconnect between voters — who have increasingly soured on the war — and Republican senators who continue to defer to Mr. Trump in backing it.
All but three Republicans — Senators Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Rand Paul of Kentucky — opposed moving forward with the measure to rein in the president’s war powers, which was offered this week by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat of New York. A single Democrat, Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, voted against the measure. He has consistently crossed party lines on the issues since the war began.
Democrats’ efforts to end hostilities not sanctioned by Congress appeared to have succeeded last month, when the Senate approved a war powers resolution, delivering a congressional rebuke after four Republicans crossed party lines to back the effort. But the concurrent resolution — which was also adopted in the House — does not carry the force of law, and the president has asserted that he has all the authority he needs to continue the war without a word from Congress.
And after Mr. Trump raged at Senate Republicans behind closed doors about that vote, they quickly held another one to block consideration of a similar measure. Subsequent attempts to muster enough Republican support for a war powers resolution have failed, including last week when the Senate blocked one offered by Senator Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland.
Democrats say the repetitive votes are still worthwhile, as opportunities to force G.O.P. senators to defend a war that has become more difficult to sell to voters.
“Are Senate Republicans listening? The country is clamoring for you to end this war,” Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, said in a speech ahead of Thursday’s vote. “I urge and plead with my Republican colleagues: Listen to the American people. Vote to end this war. We’re going to keep forcing Republicans to vote until we do.”
A poll released this week by IPSOS/Reuters found that overall support for the war has fallen to its lowest point since the conflict began, with 62 percent of American adults surveyed saying they disapprove of the U.S. attacks against Iran.
Recent surveys also show that support is slipping even among Mr. Trump’s most loyal base of voters. Those who self-identified as MAGA were less supportive of the war continuing given the economic costs than they had been two months earlier, according to a recent POLITICO poll.
Though Republican lawmakers continue to defer to Mr. Trump on the war, they have also expressed angst about its impacts.
“The rising gas prices are a real concern to everybody,” Senator Mike Rounds, Republican of South Dakota, who voted against the resolution, said on Wednesday. “The question on it is, what’s the best long-term fix? Part of it has to be stability in the Middle East.”
Republicans note that war powers resolutions are a blunt instrument, directing “the removal” of U.S. troops in what many of them argue is an irresponsible move that would only make a dangerous situation worse.
“Right now, if you simply walk away, there is no stability in the Middle East,” Mr. Rounds said.
Thursday’s vote followed renewed fighting in the region, with the two countries exchanging airstrikes that broke a dayslong pause that many hoped would be the restart to diplomatic negotiations. Fighting also expanded to allies in the Middle East, with the United States and Saudi Arabia conducting joint strikes and Egypt being drawn into the conflict when a drone struck two ships at a port near the Suez Canal.
“We’re here, we have to admit that,” Senator John Curtis, Republican of Utah, said of the current state of the conflict. He criticized the resolutions as “not really serious.”
But his vote, he said, does not mean that he is comfortable with ceding all authority to Mr. Trump.
“I do believe the War Powers Act of 1973 is very clear. It does give the president authority in that 60- to 90-day period,” he said. The law bars the president from carrying out military operations without congressional approval, unless he is responding to an imminent threat, and grants 60 days to terminate any such action with a 30-day extension. “My perspective is, we’re outside that period.”
Republicans including Mr. Curtis argue that the correct course is not a resolution to halt the war but an authorization for the use of military force that would give lawmakers more involvement in the scope and direction of the conflict.
“My strategy is to speak as a Congress, as Democrats and Republicans, about parameters that we are willing to authorize,” Mr. Curtis said. “It is incumbent on us to speak.”
Democrats say they would welcome such a measure.
“If our Republican colleagues have the strength of their convictions, they should bring an authorization to use military force in Iran to this floor,” Mr. Van Hollen said in speech last week. “We have not seen that.”
