Democrats’ plan for ending the Iran war

Editor’s Note: Welcome to The TNR Blue Book. It’s our new daily newsletter that covers Congress and much more, but with a distinctly TNR twist: Our focus will be strictly on Democrats, liberal and progressive groups, and the fight to take back power and save democracy. Every morning, you’ll get a rundown of late-breaking news, what Democrats on Capitol Hill are thinking, quick hits on what you need to know nationally, the latest on what’s coming out of the think tanks and activist groups, short interviews with progressive newsmakers and authors, and more (including some humor and political trivia!). There’s nothing else out there like it.

Inside Washington

“On day one, Democrats will pass a bill to end the Iran war” 

Democratic lawmakers currently can’t do much to stop the Iran war, House members admitted on Tuesday. Instead, their strategy is to continue to push for oversight and remind voters why gas prices are high. Then, if voters deliver them the House in November, Democrats could cut off funding. Some members would like to see that happen right after the swearing-in ceremony.

“It’s going to be very difficult,” said Representative Adam Smith, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, when I asked what legislative options Democrats currently have to curtail the war. “At the end of the day, this president—most presidents—have asserted their authority to use the military as they see fit.”

Democrats have tried a number of options against President Trump and Republicans. They’ve offered multiple amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, that would prevent future Defense Department funds from being spent on the war, but the Republican-led Rules Committee rejected the amendments. In June, Democrats passed concurrent war powers resolutions in both the House and Senate, each time with the help of four Republicans. But concurrent resolutions don’t have the force of law. Just this Monday, two American service members were killed in Jordan by an Iranian strike.

Now, some House Democrats are planning to vote against the NDAA this week in protest of its unrestricted funding for the war. “To ask us to spend another $1.5 trillion of our constituents’ taxpayer funds, hard-earned, is just outrageous,” said Representative Pat Ryan on Tuesday. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was on the Hill Tuesday afternoon making the case that the funding is crucial for national security, and for the first time gave an estimate on the war’s cost to date: a staggering $37.5 billion. His testimony was interrupted multiple times by antiwar protesters, who were removed from the hearing room.

Representative Pete Aguilar, the chair of the House Democratic Caucus, said Dems’ other symbolic legislative protests will continue, too. “We’re going to use the opportunities we have in the Rules Committee to add amendments to the NDAA [and] to future appropriation bills each and every time,” he said—even though Republicans will likely continue to reject the amendments.

But Dems also have a parallel mission: winning the messaging fight. “Normally, the way this works is public opposition reaches the point where the executive branch realizes they have to respond. But Trump has decided the public opinion doesn’t matter, and that puts us in a very dangerous place,” said Smith.

Even if Trump doesn’t respond to public opinion like most presidents do, Democrats hope voters will. “I think the American public is clear that this is a war they didn’t ask for,” said Aguilar. “I think they’re also very clear that Democrats want nothing to do with this, and so that’ll be the case that we make over the next 105 days or so.”

Representative Ro Khanna thinks the case will make itself: “As gas prices go up, as food prices go up, as Americans see more, unfortunately, of their service members be killed, the cry to end the war will increase,” he told me.

Without currently having enough votes to get their oversight amendments into the NDAA and enforce restrictions on the war, some Democrats are looking ahead to January, when they hope to have a majority in the House. “Hopefully, this war is going to be ended soon,” said Representative Ted Lieu. “If it is still around next term, on day one, Democrats will pass a bill to end the Iran war.”

—Emma Janssen  

Outside Washington

Rob Sand rakes in the (populist?) cash 

Democrat Rob Sand is smashing fundraising records in the Iowa gubernatorial race, The Des Moines Register reports. The most recent disclosures, filed this week, show $9.4 million flowing to Sand and only $6.4 million to Republican Zach Lahn, bringing Sand’s total receipts up to almost $38 million, while Lahn stands at $10 million. 

The Sand campaign on Tuesday was quick to argue that these numbers weren’t just high, but also fundamentally populist: Sand’s donations, the campaign wrote in a press release, came from 33,500 individuals as opposed to Lahn’s 431. Also, 95 percent of Sand’s contributions were under $100, with an average contribution of $280, whereas only 61 percent of Lahn’s contributions were under this figure, with an average contribution of $14,786.

This week, noted political commentator Charlie Cook predicted to people on a Zoom call that Sand will win in November, but he cast doubt on Democrat Josh Turek’s chances against Ashley Hinson in the Senate race. A New York Times/Siena University poll in late June showed Sand up two points, while a Fox News poll conducted by Beacon Research and Shaw & Company Research showed Sand up nine points.

Elsewhere:

• Florida’s gubernatorial hopefuls, still waiting for the state’s very late August 18 primary, are already pivoting to their general election messaging. Democratic front-runner David Jolly, a former Republican congressman, spent Tuesday hammering his likely Republican opponent Byron Donalds on data centers, Politico reports—“reiterating” his own support for a moratorium and saying Donalds is in the industry’s pocket. Maybe you haven’t been following this race, given that Republicans have occupied the Florida governor’s mansion for the past 27 years. But a recent poll from the University of North Florida showed Donalds leading Jolly by only five points—an intriguingly close margin given that the state’s voters backed Trump to the tune of over 13 points in 2024.
• The Washington Post’s “Climate Coach” columnist Michael J. Coren reports that peanut butter jars only need “a quick scrape” to be recyclable—no scrubbing or rinsing. Huge, if true, as they say on social media. “Peanut butter jars” were trending on the WaPo homepage on Tuesday, while the paper’s scoop on Troy Jackson’s temper languished below the digital fold.

—Heather Souvaine Horn  

The Ideas Factory

Public Citizen announces a “Combating Corruption” event on July 30 at the National Press Club, featuring Senators Chuck Schumer and Sheldon Whitehouse. The watchdog promises that the event “will dive into topics such as money in politics, contracting scandals, pay-to-play schemes and family enrichment deals for elected officials.”

Data for Progress releases a new poll finding that jittery voters overwhelmingly want the government to put some guardrails on AI. First, 69 percent of voters support “requiring AI companies to give the U.S. government a 30-day window to review their new AI models before releasing them to the public.” Second, 68 percent support “requiring large AI companies to invest a portion of their revenue in local development projects and community services.” And even larger majorities support creating new jobs training programs and direct government employment programs for workers who may be displaced by AI.

On Thursday, Brookings hosts a conversation about “top priorities for US-Africa relations in an era of great power competition,” featuring numerous experts, including Brookings senior fellow Landry Signé; Mozambique’s ambassador to the U.S., Alfredo Fabião Nuvunga; U.S. Trade and Development Agency Director of Policy and Program Management Mary Sloan; Deputy Assistant Energy Secretary Dan Byers; and others.

—Heather Souvaine Horn  

In Closing

Book of the Week: This Is The Plan: How to End America’s Meltdown and Save Democracy by Ben Wikler.

THE GIST: This Is the Plan is a “field guide” to “dictator-proof” the United States. As former head of the Wisconsin Democratic Party, Wikler helped Democrats win back the Midwestern swing state after years of gerrymandering and attacks on unions. He knows how to organize locally to fight GOP-backed voter suppression, and he knows what works in swing states, particularly in the Midwest. His plan also includes abolishing the filibuster, Supreme Court reform, and changing how the 435 members of the House of Representatives are elected. Most importantly, he thinks reform should be joyous. Democrats, he writes, should “have fun storming the castle—in a civil, metaphorical, and non-January-6th-y way.”

PRAISE: Nancy Pelosi says, “If we do what this book says, we will win.”

CRUISING THROUGH THE INDEX: In addition to big-ticket reform, Wikler also favors passing the Protecting the Right to Organize, or PRO, Act, which would expand collective bargaining rights and expand labor protections, and the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would establish a nationwide statutory right to provide and receive abortion care. 

TNR’S QUICK CRITICAL ASSESSMENT: With hindsight, it’s clear that Wikler should have been elected as chair of the Democratic National Committee after the 2024 election—though that was clear at the time, too. This isn’t the first book about unrigging democracy and saving America—but Wikler’s résumé makes this stand out. His plan worked in Wisconsin. It can work everywhere else, as well.

—Alex Shephard

Only one American president was officially kicked out of his own political party while serving as president. Who was it, and what was the party? (Sign up for The Blue Book to find the answer in tomorrow’s newsletter.)