By
House Speaker Mike Johnson complained to reporters last week, “We spend a lot of time on the House side awaiting the Senate’s action.” The Louisiana Republican added, “[I]t’s frustrating sometimes, but that’s the way the process plays out.”
Exactly seven days later, a reporter asked the GOP congressman whether the House would take a bipartisan security aid package that passed the upper chamber with 70 votes. “We are not going to be forced into action by the Senate,” the House speaker replied.
So to review, Johnson was frustrated that the Senate hadn’t passed a bill. He also didn’t much care after the Senate passed a bill.
At the same press conference, the House speaker added that the Republican conference would not be “rushed“ to tackle the issue of security aid, which made matters worse, not only because of our allies’ urgent needs abroad, but also because the issue has been pending on Capitol Hill since October. In the months that followed, the only thing the GOP majority in the House has done is (a) demand that Democrats embrace border reforms; and (b) reject a bipartisan compromise after Democrats agreed to Republicans’ demands.
A day after making the comments, the GOP-led House wrapped up its work and left for a two-week break. White House Deputy Press Secretary Andrew Bates released a memo, accusing Speaker Johnson of “cutting and running” and “sending the House on an early, undeserved vacation.” Bates added:
“Every day that Speaker Johnson causes our national security to deteriorate, America loses. And every day that he puts off a clean vote, congressional Republicans’ standing with the American people plunges. Running away for an early vacation only worsens both problems.”
It’s not every day that the White House uses language like this when targeting a congressional leader — at least not in public — and it’s likely the memo got the House speaker’s attention.
The underlying problem, however, persists. The Senate-backed security aid legislation is still pending; Ukraine is still desperate for support; and House members have still left town.
It was against this backdrop that a handful of House members from competitive districts — four Republicans and four Democrats — unveiled an alternative bill that combines some border reforms with military aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan.
While that might seem like a constructive step in the right direction, the bill includes provisions related to the “Remain in Mexico” policy — a measure that requires some asylum-seekers to wait in Mexico while their claims were adjudicated — which requires cooperation from the Mexican government, which remains opposed to the idea.
In other words, these lawmakers’ plan is based, at least in part, on an idea that can’t be implemented. It’s also received zero support from GOP leaders who control the floor.
Of course, the most obvious solution is to simply allow House members to vote on the Senate bill — both parties agree it would likely pass with relative ease — and barring that, having a few House Republicans sign a discharge petition that would allow members to circumvent GOP leaders and decide the legislation’s fate on the floor.
That remains a long shot. The door isn’t closed, but The Washington Post reported, “Moderate Republicans have indicated they are unwilling, at least for now, to band with Democrats and force a vote.”
That said, Democratic leaders are increasingly interested in this approach, and looking for a handful of GOP members who might be willing to break party ranks.
Once Rep.-elect Tom Suozzi is sworn in, it would take just four House Republicans to force an up-or-down vote. Watch this space.