Which U.S. senators sponsored or co‑sponsored Venezuela‑related legislation between 2024 and 2026 and what did those bills propose?
Executive summary
The most visible Venezuela‑related Senate legislation from 2024–2026 falls into two tracks: bipartisan statutory packages aimed at supporting a democratic transition and a high‑stakes war powers resolution seeking to rein in unilateral military action; the statutory bills were chiefly shepherded by Senators Jim Risch and Michael Bennet and their Republican colleagues, while the war powers measure was led by Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and publicly backed by Sen. Rand Paul [1] [2] [3] [4]. Reporting shows the VALOR Act and the Americas Act proposed diplomatic, economic and governance tools for Venezuela, while the Schumer resolution would require congressional authorization before further military hostilities [1] [2] [3] [5].
1. VALOR Act: bipartisan sponsors and what it would do
The Venezuela Advancing Liberty, Opportunity, and Rights (VALOR) Act was introduced by Sen. Jim Risch (R‑Idaho) with Senators Michael Bennet (D‑Colo.), John Barrasso (R‑Wyo.), Rick Scott (R‑Fla.), Bill Cassidy (R‑La.), Dan Sullivan (R‑Alaska) and Pete Ricketts (R‑Neb.) listed as original cosponsors, and the bill was framed as legislation “to help guide U.S. policy in support of a transition to democratic order in Venezuela” after what the sponsors described as a sham July 2024 election [1] [2]. The Risch/Bennet release made clear the VALOR Act was designed to coordinate U.S. backing for the opposition and to apply pressure on the Maduro regime while recognizing Venezuela’s contested 2024 vote and affirming U.S. support for a transition to the opposition‑favored leader Edmundo González Urrutia, according to the sponsors’ statements [1] [2].
2. Americas Act: Bennet and Cassidy’s hemisphere‑wide agenda
Senator Michael Bennet and Senator Bill Cassidy previously partnered on a broader Western Hemisphere package called the Americas Act in March 2024, which they described as aiming to expand partnerships, strengthen rule of law, deepen economic prosperity and embrace democratic values across the region — a bill that framed Venezuela policy within a larger strategic engagement with neighboring countries rather than an exclusively Venezuela‑only sanctions or regime‑change text [2]. That pairing indicates a dual legislative strategy from Bennet and Cassidy: targeted legislation for Venezuela (VALOR) alongside a regional bill (Americas Act) to marshal diplomatic, economic and governance tools across the hemisphere [2].
3. War powers resolution: Schumer (lead sponsor) and cross‑party support
In the immediate aftermath of U.S. military action in Venezuela, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer took the lead on a privileged war powers resolution intended to block the administration from launching further military hostilities without express congressional approval — a procedural posture meant to force a prompt Senate vote and limit executive unilateralism [3] [5]. Coverage names Schumer as a sponsor and records that Sen. Rand Paul (R‑Ky.) publicly backed the measure, making it a bipartisan but politically fraught attempt to reassert Congress’s Article I war‑powers role after the administration’s operation [3] [4].
4. Who else appears and what remains unclear in public reporting
Other Senate figures appear in reporting as engaged in debate — Sen. Tom Cotton urged pressure campaigns against Maduro’s allies and Sen. Chuck Schumer and House leaders demanded briefings — but sources do not uniformly list them as sponsors of specific bills; some are commentators or committee chairs reacting to events rather than formal cosponsors [6] [7]. Roll Call and The Hill indicate additional procedural paths and possible amendments (including comments about Sen. Tim Kaine in committee amendment contexts), but the public record in these pieces does not comprehensively enumerate every cosponsor on every draft between 2024–2026, so a definitive roll call of every cosponsor across all versions is not present in the provided reporting [8] [5].
5. Competing agendas and political context
The legislative pushes reflect competing agendas: the VALOR/americas legislative strand emphasizes democratic transition, sanctions leverage and regional partnerships led by a bipartisan mix of Republicans and Democrats [1] [2], while Schumer’s war powers move channels congressional concern about executive overreach and the legality of the administration’s military action — a constitutional check allied with a narrow cross‑party coalition including libertarian‑leaning Republicans such as Rand Paul [3] [4]. Sources also show Republican leaders initially praised the operation even as institutional prerogatives of Congress were cited as sidelined, illustrating the political tension between supporting a policy outcome and defending congressional authority [7] [9].