Lawmakers scramble for Plan B on Ukraine

The refusal by GOP leaders to stage a vote on Ukraine aid is fueling new efforts by lawmakers in both parties to locate a viable Plan B to help the embattled U.S. ally repel Russia’s invasion amid dwindling weapon supplies.

The Senate passed a foreign aid package this week featuring assistance for Ukraine, Israel and other overseas allies, but Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) quickly shot it down, saying Congress should not address international problems without also tackling the crisis on the U.S.-Mexico border.

That position aligns Johnson squarely with former President Trump and many conservatives in the GOP conference, but not the vast majority of House lawmakers, who are warning of an existential threat to European democracy — and U.S. national security — if Russia prevails. 

Democrats have been most vocal in their criticisms — at least publicly — warning that congressional inaction is a gift to America’s adversaries and poses a threat to Ukrainian sovereignty, a public pressure campaign designed to force Johnson to reconsider his opposition and bring the Senate bill quickly to the floor.

Yet behind the scenes, lawmakers in both parties are scrambling for an alternative approach to get another round of Ukraine aid to President Biden’s desk as quickly as possible, even if it means bypassing Johnson.

Rep. Gregory Meeks (N.Y.), senior Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said the most promising tactic on the short list of options is a discharge petition, an obscure procedural mechanism empowering 218 lawmakers to pass bills the Speaker refuses to consider.

Discharge petitions are rarely successful, since they require members of the majority party to buck their own leadership; the last one to compel a vote was in 2015.

But Meeks said he’s already talking to Republicans about signing on to the petition, and predicted that it was the most viable path to winning Ukraine aid, given Johnson’s entrenched opposition. 

“This is the way to do something bipartisan for our country’s national security, and to stand by our allies,” Meeks said. “It’s urgent. Ukraine needs what they need right now.”

Democrats already have a “ripe” discharge petition in their arsenal, a holdover from last year’s debt limit faceoff. It has 213 signatures — all Democrats — and will likely gain one more when Rep.-elect Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.) is sworn in following his Tuesday victory in the special election to replace former Rep. George Santos (R).

A handful of progressives, however, will likely remove their names from the petition to protest military aid to Israel without conditions on how it’s used, which is another key provision of the Senate bill. That would mean more Republicans are needed to sign on — a high bar since, on Capitol Hill, endorsing a discharge petition as a member of the majority amounts to something like a violent affront to your own leadership.

It’s largely for that reason that discharge petitions so rarely succeed.

“Great idea — if we can get the requisite number,” said Rep. Bennie Thompson (Miss.), senior Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee. 

Still, Johnson has said he supports more aid to Ukraine, as well as the other elements of the Senate bill. And a discharge petition would provide him with a form of political cover: The foreign aid would come to the floor without him putting it there, potentially insulating him from any backlash from Trump or those House conservatives who might try to remove his gavel if he stages the vote himself. 

Rep. Juan Vargas (D-Calif.) said he experienced similar scenarios when he served in the California Legislature, and that it wasn’t uncommon for under-the-gun leaders to give quiet approval for the members of their party to force the vote. 

“The discharge petition obviously can work,” he said. “You probably have about 100 Republicans who want to vote for this, and you have a good number of them who, I think, do want to sign onto a petition. They just need a nod, a little bit of a nod. And that’s why I think we first need to work with the other team, to make sure that they can get that nod.”

One Republican is already considering the rebellious act.

Rep. Greg Murphy (R-N.C.) said he is “debating” signing on to a discharge to unleash the Senate aid bill, citing the U.S.’s responsibilities in the conflicts around the world.

“I really do think we can walk and chew gum at the same time. I really do. We have to defend Ukraine, we have to defend Israel, we have to have a look at a bigger picture,” Murphy said.

He brushed aside concerns raised by some GOP lawmakers that the foreign aid will increase the already ballooning national deficit — Trump over the weekend suggested foreign aid should be allocated as a loan — arguing the money for U.S. allies would be a drop in the bucket.

“When they’re talking about $100 million, or even the number we’re talking about for Ukraine and Israel, [it] is comparatively dust when it comes to the avalanche of our debt,” Murphy said.

Yet many of the moderate Republicans thought to be most amenable to a discharge petition are balking at the idea of circumventing leadership — at least for the moment.

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who represents a district Biden won in 2020, said “one or two” Democrats have reached out to him about a discharge petition, but he is not considering joining the effort “right now.” He wants to wait for more discussions to play out.

And Rep. Mike Lawler (N.Y.), another Biden-district Republican, pledged his support for Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan assistance but deflected questions about a discharge petition. 

“I’m not gonna get into the procedural aspect of this,” he said.

The discharge petition is not the only Plan B being discussed. 

Another dark-horse option in the scramble to secure Ukraine aid is an elusive foreign-aid-plus-border proposal from Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), co-chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus, and Bacon, who is also a member. 

Fitzpatrick said he is working with a bipartisan “handful” of House and Senate lawmakers on a package that would address border security, Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan. Bacon said the border aspect is a form of the “Remain in Mexico” policy, and that the entire package would have a price tag of around $60 billion — far less than the $95 billion proposal passed out of the Senate this week — with roughly $40 billion going toward Ukraine. 

“Hopefully we can contribute to the conversation and get something passed,” Bacon said.

The legislation, however, would not include humanitarian aid, according to Fitzpatrick and Bacon, a void that will spark howls from Democrats, who have called attention to humanitarian deaths in Gaza. Bacon, though, argued that humanitarian aid in the Senate bill was what turned off some conservative lawmakers.

Fitzpatrick said he plans to present the framework to leadership, and believes it will have support in the Senate. He told reporters “we will do what it takes to get a vote on it” in the lower chamber.

“Stay tuned in the next 24 hours; you’ll see something that I think would be bipartisan,” Fitzpatrick told reporters Wednesday morning when asked about signing a discharge petition for the Senate bill.

Asked if Johnson was supportive of the idea, Bacon said “I wouldn’t say that quite yet.”

Democratic leaders, however, are already throwing cold water on any alternative to the Senate package, emphasizing that the proposal would pass with overwhelming support — if only it could reach the floor. 

“House Republicans need to put the bipartisan, comprehensive national security bill on the House floor today, tomorrow, before the end of the week, and it will pass the House with more than 300 votes and be sent to President Biden’s desk,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said.