Key Takeaways
- The United States has reached the 60‑day mark of its military campaign in Iran, triggering the 60‑day deadline imposed by the War Powers Resolution of 1973.
- Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth publicly declared that Iran’s nuclear facilities are “obliterated,” yet the conflict continues without a clear exit strategy.
- The Pentagon is seeking a $1.5 trillion budget—a 40 % increase—citing the need to sustain and modernize forces engaged in Iran while also addressing broader global threats.
- Lawmakers are divided: Democrats push to invoke the War Powers Act to force congressional approval, while many Republicans hesitate to confront the White House. – Political pressures, including rising gas prices and upcoming elections, could shape future congressional votes and legal challenges.
Podcast Overview
USA TODAY’s “The Excerpt” episode of May 1, 2026, featuring congressional reporter Zach Schermele, discusses the 60th day of the U.S. war in Iran, the Pentagon’s budget request, and the political stakes surrounding the deadline imposed by the War Powers Resolution.
War Powers Resolution and Congressional Oversight
The War Powers Resolution obligates the president to obtain congressional authorization after 60 days of hostilities; after that period, the administration must either seek a formal declaration of war or withdraw troops. Critics argue that the United States’ ongoing operations against Iran exceed the scope of any existing Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) and therefore require explicit legislative approval. Lawmakers fear that ignoring this deadline could erode legislative authority.
Financial Cost of the Conflict
Officials testified that the war has already cost roughly $25 billion, with independent think‑tank analyses estimating expenses of about $1 billion per day. To sustain operations, the Pentagon has requested a $1.5 trillion defense budget, representing a 40 % jump from the previous fiscal year, to fund both the continued fight in Iran and modernization efforts elsewhere.
Pentagon Leaders’ Testimony
During hearings before the House Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Dan Cain emphasized the necessity of additional funding to “fulfill the administration’s priorities” in the Middle East. They argued that future funding requests will likely follow as the conflict progresses and that adequate resources are essential to maintain a credible deterrent posture.
Specific Exchange Between Hegseth and Senator Adam Smith
In a tense exchange, Secretary Hegseth asserted that U.S. forces have effectively “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and are constantly monitoring any remaining material. Senator Adam Smith challenged this claim, pressing for clarification on the endgame and whether continued hostilities were justified once the alleged nuclear threat had been neutralized. The dialogue highlighted the broader uncertainty about the war’s objectives.
Legal Debate Over AUMF vs. Formal War Declaration
Hegseth suggested that because a de‑facto ceasefire exists, the 60‑day clock under the War Powers Resolution may be paused, a point contested by Senator Tim Kaine, who maintains that the statute’s language does not permit such an interpretation. Lawmakers like Senator Lisa Murkowski are exploring the possibility of drafting a new AUMF to provide a congressional “green light,” while acknowledging historical patterns in which presidents have expanded executive war powers without explicit legislative consent.
Political Ramifications and Election‑Year Pressures
Rising gasoline prices resulting from the Strait of Hormuz blockade have become a focal point for legislators wary of voter backlash. Energy Secretary Chris Wright’s optimistic projections about stable or falling prices contradicted President Trump’s concerns, underscoring internal administration disagreements. Lawmakers also worry that continued high fuel costs could sway public opinion and impact re‑election prospects in the approaching midterms.
Future Scenarios and Possible Congressional Action
The next crucial test will be whether Republican senators flip their votes on War Powers Resolutions that seek to compel the administration to curtail or end the campaign. Should a resolution pass, it could force the White House to either negotiate a political settlement or face legal challenges questioning the legitimacy of its continued military engagement. The outcome will likely be shaped by constituent pressure, gas price trends, and diplomatic progress with Iranian intermediaries.
Closing Summary and Outlook In summary, the United States stands at a pivotal juncture: the 60‑day mark triggers constitutional scrutiny, the Pentagon seeks unprecedented budgetary resources, and partisan dynamics are intensifying around the authority to wage war. Public engagement—through calls to representatives and awareness of fuel price impacts—will be decisive in influencing whether Congress reasserts its constitutional role or allows the executive branch to continue expanding its war‑authorizing powers unchecked. The coming weeks will reveal whether legislative checks will meaningfully constrain the conflict or merely reinforce existing power imbalances.