By Alexander Bolton - 09/03/13 05:33 PM EDT
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnellMitch McConnellOvernight Healthcare: Dems dig in over Zika funding Business groups ramp up pressure to fill Ex-Im board Senate Dems: No August break without Zika deal MORE (R-Ky.) on Tuesday did not offer support for a military strike against Syria.
In a stark contrast with GOP leaders in the House, McConnell voiced skepticism about a strike and said Obama needed to explain more to Congress and the public.
McConnell is up for reelection in 2014 and is facing a tough Tea Party challenge from the right.
Fellow Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand PaulRand PaulTrump: Rivals who don't back me shouldn't be allowed to run for office Trump hires Rand Paul's former digital director: report Trump flexes new digital muscle MORE opposes military intervention in Syria, something that may be weighing on McConnell.
Senate Republicans said the president needs to do a better job explaining his rationale for a military strike in the wake of chemical weapons attacks outside of Damascus.
The GOP skepticism means that Senate Majority Leader Harry ReidHarry ReidOvernight Finance: Obama signs Puerto Rico bill | Trump steps up attacks on trade | Dodd-Frank backers cheer 'too big to fail' decision | New pressure to fill Ex-Im board Iowa poll: Clinton up 14 on Trump, Grassley in tight race with Dem Lynch meeting with Bill Clinton creates firestorm for email case MORE (D-Nev.) will have to rely heavily on his own caucus to pass a resolution authorizing force.
This could force him to corral skeptical liberals like Sen. Chris MurphyChris MurphyReid backs House Puerto Rico bill Meet the man who sparked the Democratic revolt on guns The Hill's 12:30 Report MORE (D-Conn.), who have expressed concern about another military action in the Middle East.
McConnell’s deputy, Senate Republican Whip John CornynJohn CornynOvernight Tech: Obama signs FOIA reform bill | Musicians take YouTube fight to Europe | Feds probe first driverless car death Obama signs bill to expand access to federal records Lynch meeting with Bill Clinton creates firestorm for email case MORE (Texas), also voiced misgivings about a limited strike against the military forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
“What the president can do is to make the case to the American people. It’s important that he bring Congress in but he needs to make the case to the American people and that case hasn’t been made yet,” Cornyn told reporters.
Cornyn said a limited military strike might have a counterproductive effect.
“If it is so targeted and so limited it may have the opposite effect than the president intends,” he said. “It may be viewed as so insignificant that it actually emboldens other international bullies.”
Sen. Jim RischJim RischOvernight Defense: Senate rejects new FBI surveillance powers | Brexit vote looms | Push for new military aid deal with Israel Senators push vote to condemn Russia's 'reckless actions' Overnight Finance: Senate taking up Puerto Rico bill this month | Dems attack SEC chief | House votes to limit IRS donor data MORE (R-Idaho), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he was “extremely reluctant” to authorize a strike on Libya.
But Sen. Bob CorkerBob CorkerGingrich, Christie top Trump’s VP list: report Senate honors Tennessee coach Pat Summitt GOP senator: Something 'very, very good' can come from Brexit vote MORE (Tenn.), the top ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations panel, predicted enough Republicans would support an authorization resolution to pass it through the Senate with at least 60 votes.
Corker said Obama needs to make a broader argument for why it is important to support rebel fighters in Syria and why the conflict is important to U.S. national security.
“I have a strong sense that we will be able to come to terms fairly quickly with what an authorization ought to say,” Corker said of his talks with Senate Democratic leaders over an authorization of force resolution.
This story was updated at 1:58 p.m.