Speaker Johnson rebuffs Senate Ukraine package

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) rejected a bipartisan Senate proposal providing aid to Ukraine and other foreign allies Monday, raising new questions about how — or if — Congress will adopt the assistance ahead of November’s elections. 

The Senate legislation, which would provide billions of dollars in military assistance for Ukraine and Israel, among other foreign aid provisions, passed the upper chamber early Tuesday morning with more than a dozen Republicans on board.

But Johnson is sending clear signals that he won’t bring the bill to the House floor because it lacks the tougher border security measures House Republicans had demanded months ago, at the outset of debate. 

“[In] the absence of having received any single border policy change from the Senate, the House will have to continue to work its own will on these important matters,” Johnson said Monday night in a statement. “America deserves better than the Senate’s status quo.”

---

Top stories from The Hill

• Supreme Court to confront 14th Amendment disqualification — and not just Trump’s
• Senate Dems privately fear Biden’s age could cost him White House
• Senate passes Ukraine funding in predawn vote 
• Here are the Senate Republicans who voted for the Ukraine package

---

The Speaker’s position is a shot at his Senate counterpart, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who is racing to secure more funding for Ukraine’s beleaguered military forces two years into Russia’s invasion.

It also aligns House Republicans squarely with former President Trump, the runaway favorite to clinch the GOP’s presidential nomination, who opposes more Ukraine aid and is pressing congressional Republicans to do the same.

Johnson’s rejection of the Senate bill does not quite guarantee the debate over Ukraine funding is dead on Capitol Hill. But it shrinks Congress’s options for getting it passed. 

Heading into the week, there appeared to be a handful of avenues the Speaker might follow to adopt new Ukraine funding, for which he announced his support shortly after winning the Speaker’s gavel last October. He could either bring the Senate bill to the floor; split the package into stand-alone pieces to be voted on one-by-one; or attach it to must-pass government spending bills, which are slated for consideration in early March.

Johnson’s recent demand for Ukraine aid combined with border security measures, however, seems to eliminate all three of those options.

But a fourth remains viable: Ukraine supporters in both parties could circumvent Johnson and force the foreign aid supplemental to the floor through a discharge petition, an obscure procedural gambit which would require bipartisan buy-in. 

If successful, it would deal a devastating blow to Johnson’s leadership. But it would also keep his fingerprints off of the decision to bring the bill to the floor, insulating the Speaker from any blowback from Trump or his conservative House allies, who might otherwise be moved to file a motion to remove Johnson from power. 

House Democrats have a “ripe” discharge petition, a hangover from last year’s debt limit debacle, that includes 213 signatures — five shy of the 218 needed to force legislation to the floor.

If the petition is used for the Senate’s foreign aid package, however, a number of progressives would likely remove their names to protest the inclusion of Israel military aid without conditions, meaning more GOP signatures would be needed.

Getting even a handful of Republicans to sign on will be a heavy lift, since joining a discharge petition while in the majority marks a major rebuke of leadership. The last successful petition was in 2015.

At least one senator, however, is already eyeing the long-shot strategy. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said he has spoken to House lawmakers about a discharge petition, according to recent news reports. Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), meanwhile, said lawmakers were discussing different scenarios to pass the bill in the House.

Another option would have GOP leaders attaching foreign aid provisions to must-pass government spending bills, which Congress will have to take up in early March. But that appears to be a less likely scenario, given Johnson’s insistence on border security provisions and the difficulties already facing appropriators as they race for a bipartisan deal to avert a shutdown. 

The border security demands mark the latest twist in the head-spinning debate over Ukraine aid. 

Initially, Johnson had insisted that any new funding for Kyiv be accompanied by tough new border security measures to address the migrant crisis. 

House Republicans then helped to sink a bipartisan border security deal negotiated in the Senate, which conservatives deemed too lenient. Afterward, they shifted their focus to the White House, arguing that President Biden alone is responsible for the crisis — and that Biden alone should fix it through executive orders.

“The president has the ability right now, the power to stop it. …  But he chooses not to, because this is all a sham and it’s purposeful,” Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) told reporters recently. “It’s a purposeful effort to dilute our society, and to undermine our way of life — to destroy Western civilization.”

Johnson’s statement Monday brought the GOP position back to where it began: with an insistence that Congress must pass tougher border security as a condition of winning Republican support for Ukraine aid. And yet the Speaker’s dismissal of the Senate supplemental did not come as a complete surprise.

If the Speaker brought the Senate bill straight to the floor, he risked a revolt from conservatives; a bid to end his Speakership; and the alienation of Trump, who opposes more Ukraine aid and is warning Capitol Hill Republicans to reject it.

But there is still immense pressure from the other side of the foreign aid debate.

If Johnson declines to stage a vote on the measure — which he appears poised to do — he will leave a beleaguered democratic ally in the lurch; agitate moderate Republicans clamoring for the aid; and expose his party to election-year accusations that it failed to confront Russian President Vladimir Putin as he seeks to reunify, by unprompted force, parts of the old Soviet Empire. 

And it’s not only Democrats who are ready to denounce inaction as a dereliction of responsibility.

“I know it’s become quite fashionable in some circles to disregard the global interests we have as a global power. To bemoan the responsibilities of global leadership. To lament the commitment that has underpinned the longest drought of great power conflict in human history,” McConnell said Sunday from the chamber floor. 

“This is idle work for idle minds.”

McConnell rallied a group of Republicans to help advance the foreign aid package, which includes roughly $60 billion for Ukraine; $14 billion for Israel; $5 billion to help allies in the Indo-Pacific region counter China’s growing influence; and $9 billion in humanitarian aid for victims of strife around the globe, including those in Gaza.

The cleanest path for the House would have been to simply take up the Senate package, which would likely pass with a big bipartisan vote. Yet Trump is promoting his “America First” agenda by fighting to sink the bill, and at least one staunch Trump ally — Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) — has threatened to file a motion to remove Johnson’s gavel if he brings Ukraine aid to the floor.

“It’s an absolute no-go,” Greene warned last month.

How successful that effort would be remains uncertain.

Not only is it unclear how many other conservatives would join Greene, but some Democrats are already suggesting that, if Johnson supports bipartisan deals to fund the federal government and prop up Ukraine, they would help him remain in power. Those dynamics present one scenario for Johnson to adopt Ukraine aid and keep his gavel — if enough Democrats are on board.

Despite the swirling political dynamics, Johnson is continuing to hammer the Senate as the debate over Ukraine aid hangs over his Speakership.

“House Republicans were crystal clear from the very beginning of discussions that any so-called national security supplemental legislation must recognize that national security begins at our own border,” he said Monday night. 

“[T]he Senate has failed to meet the moment.”

Updated at 12:32 p.m.