His subsequent war powers votes underscore the political tightrope now facing Republicans, particularly those who ran under the “America First” banner and have generally opposed sending troops into harm’s way. Mackenzie is among the Republicans who say Congress shouldn’t weaken the president’s “leverage” and tie his hands with a vote to end hostilities. Yet he’s also raised concerns about the length of the war and the possibility that it drags on indefinitely.

“Once the president has taken that action, that first action, if we were to pull back, it would actually leave us more vulnerable and less safe by leaving all of their capabilities in place but having started a conflict like this,” Mackenzie told Fox News in March, days after the war began.

“So, we do need to follow through on the objectives, but we also need to be very much on guard to make sure that it doesn’t expand beyond what we are able to achieve,” he said.

Defense hawks are facing a similar dilemma as President Donald Trump prepares to wind down the war, expressing concern over an interim peace deal that may not fully dismantle Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

The House voted to end the war in Iran earlier this month, with all Republicans except four opposing the latest war powers resolution. But legislative action can easily be vetoed by Trump, and the Senate blocked a similar measure this week.

The president has offered several rationales for the war in Iran, chief among them dismantling Tehran’s nuclear program. On regime change, Trump has given conflicting messages, both touting the removal of Iranian leaders and stating he “never cared” about pursuing it.

Mackenzie positioned himself as an “America First” Republican throughout his 2024 campaign, siding with Trump at a time when he promised to negotiate an end to the wars in Gaza and Ukraine.

And though he’s continued that posture since his election, Democrats are eager to use the Iran conflict to claim a double standard on the part of Republicans. Earlier this month, Bob Brooks, his general election opponent, posted, “What changed buddy?” after Mackenzie’s third vote on the Iran war.

Brooks and other Democrats are hoping to exploit public sentiment against the war and have used the same line of attack in other races. According to a recent Fox News poll, 58% of voters think the United States made the wrong decision in launching the war in late February.

Pennsylvania’s 7th District, which Mackenzie has represented since 2025, is among those being targeted this cycle by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Congress has not had to vote on the cost of the war, so far estimated at $29 billion. But the White House is expected to request a Pentagon funding bill later this year that would address Iran as well as this year’s targeted operation in Venezuela.

Mackenzie was critical of “spending hundreds of billions of dollars on foreign wars” during the 2024 campaign and has continued that opposition as a freshman lawmaker.

He opposed a bill providing more Ukraine aid last week, arguing the legislation “literally moves us backwards.” It is not yet clear how he would handle a vote to offset the cost of the Iran war.

When asked about his prior views on Iran, a spokesman for Mackenzie noted that he’s voted to end the use of military force authorizations that, until recently, were still on the books for Iraq and said the congressman has emphasized “the need for caution in military conflicts like Iran to guard against a new forever war.”

READ IN FULL: THE 14-POINT PEACE AGREEMENT WITH IRAN

“Congressman Mackenzie remains opposed to the failed neocon foreign policies of the past that started as bombing and regime change efforts and resulted in decades-long wars that took an unfathomable toll on America and our interests,” spokesman Arnaud Armstrong said.

“The Congressman is encouraged that the military operations in Iran successfully degraded Iran’s nuclear and military capabilities through air superiority, eliminated terrorists who targeted Americans, and diminished Iran’s ability to project terror through its proxies — all while avoiding the use of ground troops and securing a peace plan in just over 100 days, as opposed to American troops being deployed for more than 20 years,” Armstrong said.