A new outline detailing Speaker Mike Johnson’s plan for moving foreign aid through the House has been presented, which includes four distinct bills aimed at addressing aid for Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and other national security priorities. Johnson asserts that all proposals will be put to a vote by the end of the week.
This strategy has faced immediate pushback from some conservative lawmakers who insist that any additional aid for Ukraine must be paired with stricter security measures at the U.S.-Mexico border.
RelatedPosts
These proposals are absent from Johnson’s legislative plan, raising concerns about the feasibility of his approach. “A lot of conservatives are very upset about how this is going down,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) stated. “He’s literally broken his promise.”
Johnson shared his proposal during a closed-door meeting with House GOP members in the Capitol basement on Monday, following months of indecision on a politically sensitive issue that has divided his party and jeopardized his leadership.
The initial step in the plan is to establish a procedural rule governing all four bills—each focusing on Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan, with the fourth dedicated to various national security priorities. Each proposal will be voted on separately, contrary to the Senate’s combined $95 billion foreign aid legislation.
According to Johnson, the fourth bill related to national security will propose funding for Ukraine aid through the seizure of Russian assets, include some aid as loans, and implement new sanctions on Iran following recent attacks on Israel.
Another Republican indicated that the bill would also aim to ban TikTok and include provisions for convertible loans for humanitarian relief. Johnson’s approach allows lawmakers the flexibility to choose which elements of the Senate bill they support and which they oppose.
To enhance this opportunity, he has also permitted amendments to be presented for each proposal. “My phone melted over the weekend, with all the members letting me know all of their ideas,” Johnson remarked to reporters after the closed-door meeting.
“There was a consensus that was recognized, in my view, from all the opinions that were shared, and that is that it really was the will of my colleagues to vote on these measures independently and not have them all sandwiched together as the Senate had done.”
The text of the bills is expected to be released “sometime early” on Tuesday, with Johnson committing to follow a House rule that allows lawmakers 72 hours to review the bills before voting. This timeline would require the House to remain in Washington at least until Friday, extending their stay beyond the initial schedule.
Despite the plan’s presentation, many questions remain regarding the legislation, particularly concerning how closely the House proposals will align with the Senate’s overall spending figures and whether the four bills will be sent to the Senate separately or combined into one package.
Democrats’ responses to Johnson’s proposal remain uncertain. Members from both chambers have consistently stated their preference for the House to consider the Senate-passed supplemental aid bill, a position reiterated by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) as recently as Monday morning.
Some leading Democrats have expressed early doubts about Johnson’s strategy, particularly since it could delay additional aid for Ukraine’s struggling forces while both chambers are on recess next week.
“They haven’t come up with [legislation] yet, and we don’t have time. We don’t. So I’m highly skeptical,” commented Rep. Adam Smith (Wash.), the senior Democrat on the Armed Services Committee.
“Ukraine’s on life support, and it’s like they’re getting ready to pull the plug here. Not even so much pulling the plug. They’re tripping over the plug. It’s not even necessarily intentional; it’s just not understanding the seriousness of the situation and the importance of the timing.”
The Republican response to Johnson’s foreign aid initiative was mixed, with some hard-line conservatives praising his decision to separate the priorities into distinct bills while also criticizing the exclusion of border security measures.
“I do like the fact that Johnson separated them,” Rep. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) stated after leaving the GOP conference meeting, but he described the absence of border security provisions as “horrible.”
“The border should be the priority,” he continued. “How many times did you hear leadership and other Republicans saying, hey, this is the hill we’re gonna die on, right? And now it’s just gone. So I don’t like that.”
Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.), chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, echoed this sentiment, commending the separation of priorities and the planned amendment process while criticizing the lack of border security.
“The American people are gonna be very disappointed if we don’t require border security in order to fund Ukraine because we have basically said we were going to do that for the last six months,” he remarked.
During the GOP meeting, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) encouraged Republican leaders to withhold foreign aid bills—even if they pass this week—until the Senate agrees to consider House-passed border reforms that Johnson left out of the foreign aid discussions.
“We should not send over any aid to any other countries until the Senate takes up HR-2,” Gaetz asserted, referring to a GOP border bill passed by the House last year. Other Republicans, including Greene, have joined in the criticism, with Greene threatening to push for a vote to remove Johnson over the Ukraine aid issue.
After the conference, Greene told reporters, “I am firmly against the plan as it stands right now,” though she did not disclose when or if she would initiate her resolution to remove Johnson.
“I haven’t decided on that yet,” she noted but argued that Johnson “definitely not going to be Speaker next Congress if we’re lucky enough to have the majority.”
When asked if he would remain Speaker for the rest of the Congress, Greene replied, “That is to be determined; like I said, I’m still processing what I heard in there.”
Some members have opted to remain noncommittal as they evaluate the proposal and await the specifics. “We’ll see,” Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said when asked about his perspective on the plan.
Johnson’s foreign aid proposal will face its first challenge during a procedural vote to initiate debate on the bills. Votes on rules that govern legislative debate are typically routine party-line matters, with the majority party supporting and the minority party opposing.
However, hard-line conservatives have previously blocked rule votes throughout this Congress to protest various decisions by GOP leadership, raising the possibility that they may do so again regarding the foreign aid legislation.
When asked if he would support the procedural vote, Crane, who has opposed rules in the past, replied, “we’ll see,” while Good stated, “I’m gonna wait to see what the rule looks like.”
Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.) indicated he would not support the rule unless the foreign aid legislation addresses the situation at the southern border and incorporates H.R. 1, the House GOP’s extensive energy package, which he believes could help fund foreign assistance.
