Loading record
Loading record
Issue tracker
Compare recorded congressional votes and candidate statements in Connecticut on the war in Iran.
3 of 11 tracked candidates have no quote on file yet. Candidates include sitting members running in 2026, so some people appear in both rows.
Connecticut — Majority opposes the war ·
“Some of us have been briefed on the war plan. And while I cannot disclose any details, I can say this: the plan is insane. It will not achieve objectives and will set off a new cycle of escalation.”
“As a member of Congress, I would not support additional funding for an expanded military conflict without clear intelligence, documented evidence of the threat, a defined mission, and a full understanding of what we’re asking our military to do. I would want to review that intelligence myself before making a decision that could put American lives at risk. I will always support doing whatever is necessary to defend the United States and protect the American people. But I will never support sending our sons and daughters into another unnecessary war simply because Washington decides that’s what we should do.”
I don’t believe war is ever a good thing. I believe in protecting America and the American people. If that means taking military action against Iran to prevent them from developing nuclear weapons, or using tough economic sanctions to stop them, then those options need to be on the table. But we also have to understand who we’re dealing with. The Iranian regime has a long history of hostility toward the United States, and its leaders have repeatedly used the phrase “Death to America.” We cannot ignore that, but we also cannot rush into another military conflict without understanding the consequences. First, let’s understand something about our Constitution. Only Congress has the power to formally declare war. The president, as commander in chief, has the authority to direct military operations, but that authority is not unlimited. Congress also controls federal funding, including military spending. And that’s where Congress has a tremendous responsibility. If Congress refuses to authorize additional funding for a military conflict, it can place significant limits on how that conflict continues. I do not want to see another generation of young Americans sent into a prolonged war without a clear mission, a legitimate national security reason, and an exit strategy. I’ve seen what war does to people. We’ve lost too many young men and women. Too many have come home suffering from PTSD, missing limbs, and injuries that will affect them for the rest of their lives. Their families suffer right alongside them. We cannot keep repeating the mistakes of the past. There must be a legitimate reason for military action. There must be credible evidence that America or our allies face a serious threat. We cannot simply get involved in another endless conflict. The Iranian regime has been a problem for nearly 47 years, dating back to the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the hostage crisis. I believe previous administrations, including Ronald Reagan’s, missed opportunities to confront that threat more effectively. We should never have allowed this situation to reach the point it has today. But that doesn’t mean every problem needs to be solved with bombs and American troops. As a member of Congress, I would not support additional funding for an expanded military conflict without clear intelligence, documented evidence of the threat, a defined mission, and a full understanding of what we’re asking our military to do. I would want to review that intelligence myself before making a decision that could put American lives at risk. I will always support doing whatever is necessary to defend the United States and protect the American people. But I will never support sending our sons and daughters into another unnecessary war simply because Washington decides that’s what we should do. America’s security comes first, but so do the lives of the men and women who defend it. I hope that answers your question. I’m giving you the most honest answer I can because this is exactly how I feel. Christopher Lancia Lancia for Congress 2026
“On the Concurrent Resolution H.Con.Res. 89: A concurrent resolution directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran.”
“On the Concurrent Resolution H.Con.Res. 89: A concurrent resolution directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran.”
“President Trump launched an unauthorized war with no explanation to the American people”
“The United States Congress has been clear—President Trump needs to end his illegal war in Iran,”
“On Agreeing to the Resolution: Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran.”
“On Agreeing to the Resolution: Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran.”
“On Agreeing to the Resolution: Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran.”
“On Agreeing to the Resolution: Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran.”
“On Agreeing to the Resolution: Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran.”
“What I will say is it's about time. This is, you know, while not a declared war, that country has been at war with us for 47-plus years, and we finally have a leader that was willing to take the actions that the military has known we've needed to take forever.”
The House has voted six times on Iran war powers measures in the 119th Congress. Only three of those votes used identical text (H.Con.Res. 40, 86, and 93), so only those three are comparable member to member. The Senate has held two substantive votes. Roll call 184 on 2026-06-23 used the same text and passed 50-48. Roll call 244 on 2026-09-24, on H.Con.Res. 89, used different text and was rejected 49-50, so it is not counted. Because a concurrent resolution is never presented to the President, passage in both chambers did not by itself change the legal posture of the operation.
Comparable text
Roll call 114 — H.Con.Res. 40
2026-04-16 · Failed 213–214
Comparable text
Roll call 199 — H.Con.Res. 86
2026-06-03 · Passed 215–208
Comparable text
Roll call 307 — H.Con.Res. 93
2026-09-15 · Passed 220–204
H.Con.Res. 38, 75, and 89 carried nearly identical titles but materially different text, including different deadlines and rules of construction. Votes on those measures are not counted toward any member's position or used as evidence of a changed position.
A member's map position is their most recent recorded vote on the identical text. Yea, a vote to direct the removal of U.S. forces, counts as opposing the war; Nay counts as supporting its continuation. Members who voted Present, did not vote, or had not yet taken office for every comparable vote are listed as having no recorded position.
The totals and map colors count members serving now. Members who resigned or died during the series stay listed with their recorded votes, marked as former representatives, and are not counted.
Direct quotes are labeled one at a time by the position each one states, such as opposing or supporting the war, or a mixed or conditional view. A label applies to that quote alone. It does not change the speaker's vote-based map position, and candidates who have not cast a comparable vote have no map position.
The candidate totals group each 2026 candidate by their most recent quote that opposes or supports the war. Candidates whose quotes are only mixed, conditional or unclear are counted as mixed or conditional, and a candidate whose opposing and supporting quotes have switched is also counted as a position change. Candidates with no quote on file are not placed in any group.
A “position changed” marker means the member's recorded vote on the identical text switched during the series. The marker records the change; it does not assert a reason. Where a member explained the change on the floor of the House or Senate, the statement count on their entry links the debate record.
Votes on discharge and other procedural motions are not positions on the war and are not counted here. Vote records come from the Clerk of the House and the Senate; floor statements come from the Congressional Record. Each direct quote links to the original source where it appeared.
This page puts two public records side by side: how sitting members of Congress voted on Iran war powers, and what sitting senators, House members and 2026 candidates have said about the war in their own words.
Recorded votes
Map colors and vote totals come from recorded votes only. Vote positions are derived from recorded votes on the word-for-word identical war powers texts H.Con.Res. 40, 86, and 93 (House) and Senate roll call 184. A vote to direct the removal of U.S. forces counts as opposing the war; a vote against removal counts as supporting its continuation. Other Iran votes of the 119th Congress used different text and are not comparable.
Direct quotes
Each quote appears with its date, a label for the position it states, and a link to its source. A sitting member's quotes appear on that member's entry, next to their votes. Candidates' quotes appear in the state view, and every quote is also in the full list of statements below the map. A quote does not change a member's map color. The candidate totals count each candidate's most recent quote that opposes or supports the war.
The identical text behind every comparable vote
Should the House direct the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1544(c)), to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran, other than elements necessary to defend the United States or an ally or partner from imminent attack, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or a specific authorization for use of military force against Iran?
Vote records current through Senate roll call 244 of 2026-09-24. That vote, on H.Con.Res. 89 (rejected 49-50), used different text and is not counted.
These tracker downloads are licensed under CC BY 4.0. Credit The Dispute Index, link to this tracker and the license, and note any changes. The license covers the downloaded compilation and DI position labels. Case pages, other site text and linked source material have separate rights.
Votes and individual statements appear separately. Candidates with no quote on file have an empty position. The roster covers candidates recorded by DI, not every candidate in an election.
The generation time records when this data snapshot was prepared. For votes, date records the vote date and as_of records the tracker date. For statements, date records when the statement occurred and as_of records when DI first published it. These dates do not mean every source was rechecked then. Empty fields mean the information is not included in this download. Count votes and statements separately; multiple statements can belong to the same person.