In an unusual show of bipartisan concern, Congressional lawmakers are raising questions about the Trump administration's ambitious plans to manage Venezuelan oil revenues. Both Democrats and Republicans are signaling a need for stringent oversight, despite President Donald Trump's assurances of control over the funds derived from oil sales.

Democrats have voiced strong opposition, with Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) describing the administration's approach as tantamount to indefinitely commandeering Venezuela’s oil sector. "It's an insane plan," Murphy stated candidly after a briefing with Trump officials. "They are proposing to steal Venezuela's oil at gunpoint forever and use that leverage to run the country."

While Republicans have shown some support for the initiative, they too are insisting on a transparent and accountable process for handling the oil revenues. Senator John Hoeven (R-N.D.) praised Energy Secretary Chris Wright's expertise but emphasized the necessity of Congressional supervision. "Chris Wright is brilliant when it comes to energy," Hoeven noted. "Nobody's going to do a better job than him in terms of making sure that that oil is properly marketed. Congress will have an oversight role. He'll be up here testifying in front of us exactly how they're doing it."

Senator Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) highlighted the strategic advantages of controlling the oil revenues, particularly for influencing Venezuela's fragile economy and political landscape. However, he expressed concerns about the potential market impact on U.S. crude producers, especially from his home state of North Dakota. "As long as it's not sold at a discount I probably don't have a big problem with it. As long as they aren't going to use that dirty, cheap oil to flood the market," Cramer added, noting the delicate balance needed in handling the imports.

Speaker Mike Johnson also weighed in, cautiously endorsing the administration's strategy provided it doesn't involve taxpayer funds. "I do not expect that they would," Johnson said, indicating a reluctance to commit public money to the venture.

The unfolding debate reflects deepening anxieties over the ethical and economic implications of the U.S. assuming control over a foreign nation's vital resources. With Congressional leaders from both sides of the aisle demanding accountability, the administration's next moves will likely be under intense scrutiny.

*Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.*