Dems save Johnson's $95B foreign aid plan from GOP rebel blockade | Fox News
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Speaker Johnson faces hardship over foreign aid bills
Fox News senior congressional correspondent Chad Pergram has the latest on efforts to oust the House speaker, on 'Your World.'
Speaker Mike Johnson's $95 billion foreign aid proposal survived a key test vote Friday morning, setting House lawmakers up to consider its four individual components sometime Saturday.
In a stunning break from modern historical precedent, more Democrats voted for the GOP proposal than Johnson's fellow Republicans.
Democrats bucked party norms to support the plan through a procedural hurdle known as a "rule vote" after conservative foreign aid skeptics defected from Republicans to try to block the plan. It passed 316-94, with 165 Democrats and 151 Republicans in favor.
Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., the top Democrat on the House Rules Committee that advanced the proposal on Thursday night, said before the Friday vote, "Democrats are providing the votes necessary to advance this legislation to the floor, because at the end of the day, so much more is at stake here than petty [brinkmanship]."
The rule vote now sets up debate on the four individual bills followed by amendment votes and four votes on passage sometime Saturday. It's highly unusual for Democrats, or any opposition party, to cross the aisle on a rule vote, but it underscores the urgency that lawmakers on both sides feel about sending aid to foreign allies.
The 55 Republican dissidents on this latest rule vote illustrate the fractured House Republican Conference that Johnson is trying to manage, with the House Freedom Caucus and their allies having wielded outsized influence for much of this term.
Three of the four bills fund Ukraine, Israel, and the Indo-Pacific. A fourth bill includes national security priorities like the House's recently passed crackdown on TikTok's ownership, as well as the REPO Act, which would liquidate seized Russian assets and give that funding to Ukraine.
Johnson's push for foreign aid has infuriated members on the right of his House GOP conference, putting added pressure on the Louisiana Republican as he also navigates a historically slim majority.
Earlier this week, Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., threatened to oust Johnson if he did not step aside after a House vote on his foreign aid plan. Massie is now signed onto Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's, R-Ga., motion to vacate resolution, which, if deemed "privileged" by Greene, would force the House to begin voting on Johnson's potential ouster within two legislative days.
Massie said during debate ahead of the final vote, "I'm concerned that the speaker's cut a deal with the Democrats to fund foreign wars rather than to secure our border."
Greene's amendment to strip all Ukraine funding from the foreign aid bill is slated to get a vote on Saturday ahead of the vote on final passage.
Elizabeth Elkind is a politics reporter for Fox News Digital leading coverage of the House of Representatives. Previous digital bylines seen at Daily Mail and CBS News.
Tags
Who is online
36 visitors
Don't like it? It is from Fox News FFS! Marjorie Taylor Greene is already moving to remove Republican House Speaker Johnson!
Excellent retort by MTG, all mouth and no brains.
Trump really should pick her for his VP nominee...
Democrats care more about Ukraine than they do about the US, period.
And Palestinians, and illegal aliens.
[removed][✘]
“removed for context by charger
[removed][✘]
Russia is not a threat to NATO except for their nuclear weapons. There is no way to remove those- unless you feel like ending all life on the planet.
What is being accomplished by throwing more US taxpayer money down the Ukrainian shit hole? Other than making politicians and their cronies richer?
Ukraine offers the US jack shit of nothing.
If the EU is so damn worried it can actually honor the commitments they have made to Ukraine.
The US has done more than enough.
165 Democrats voted to advance gop Speaker Johnson's bill as the hardcore MAGA voted to surrender like a bunch of Vichy Frenchies!
Surrender??
Did Crazy Old Joe get us into a war?
[removed][✘]
And now they will vote to remove him.
Fine by me, but then who is the gop going the get to drive their MAGA Clown Car? Marjorie Taylor Greene I presume!
The lesson is that you can't work with democrats.
No, the lesson here is that the Freedom Caucus still doesn't want to govern. They want authoritarian control to decree how Americans live.
Does it really matter since it's quickly heading towards a brick wall...
Yes, there are times when nothing getting done is better that working with people who stab you in the back.
Pelosi made them what they are by having them all vote as one. If I am the speaker with a 1 or 2 seat majority, I shut everything down until the next election.
Don't blame me. Blame the idiots in the last election.
The Freedom Caucus both stabs each other in the back and wants to get nothing done.
Thankfully you will never be Speaker. The current crop of failures have no reason to bitch about border security when they were handed everything they wanted, but had to shut it down like spoiled middle schoolers.
I will blame ever single person who voted for the Freedom Caucus and The Squad. I will also blame each and every one of them personally for being the Populist douchebags they are.
Republicans have a tiny majority, and members think for themselves. Had they got the 40 seats they should have won there would be no problems. democrats have taken advantage of it. They have been trained to fall in line behind one leader. It has already been proven. If a speaker works with democrats to put forward a bipartisan bill, he gets outed not just by members on his right, but by the very democrats he worked with. Therefor the Speaker need only concern himself with Committee matters.
Yes.
Do they really?
That's hard to believe.
As much as I don't like it, I wouldn't expect them to do otherwise.
The Squad voted with all the other Dems in this? I'm not sure that's true...
I'm trying to understand your point. You say Dems are bad because they vote lockstep against Reps? And a Rep Speaker is bad when he convinces Dems to work bipartisanly? That makes no sense.
I'd rather Congress to work together to get shit done and stop playing partisan games? Instead we get middle schooler games with amendments and the populists that voted them want more...
Had they rejected MAGA candidates they could have easily won 30 of those seats. The Bard has Cassius say something pithy about this.
... especially during a maga civil war in the house.
Lol
You can care about both, and you can even see that the two are linked.
Democrats have proven repeatedly you can't. Their refusal to even bring the bill the House passed on border security to the floor proves it.
Johnson is an Establishment sell out. More interested in getting something passed than actually getting the will of those that put him in power done.
Why bother voting for Establishment Republicans when they will fold like a cheap paper bag at the first sign of pressure?
Democrats got exactly what they wanted. $60.84 billion for Ukraine (Johnson and Establishment pukes can scream all they want about it not being a blank check. But they are relying on Brandon's administration to keep track of the money. They have already proven they aren't up to that task); and jack shit of nothing for border security.
Republicans even caved to Democrats on money going to Israel and Gaza. 17 billion to a country that doesn't damn well need it; and 9 billion to Gaza which won't even come close to helping the people there; and they will never thank us for it- but who cares it is more US tax payer money down the international shit hole.
The shear amount of stupid in Establishment House and Senate Republicans is staggering.
I think you meant stereotypical...
No surprise, the little terrorist girls from Minnesota and the Bronx voted against the bill. I guess they are Putins bitches.
There is no surprise. Populists, no matter what side of the isle they come from, don't want to govern. They all think they know better than everyone else.
You realize you just debunked one of Vic's points?
Just like the MAGA crowd on the rtight.
Yup, Democrats own Biden's quagmires now. Trump and MAGA resistance to Biden's quagmire policy really does provide Republicans political cover. Democrats freely chose to vote for more war.
Democrats and Republicans chose to support Ukraine against Putin's Russian aggression!
And Democrats chose to support Israel against Palestinian/Iranian aggression.
Biden hasn't limited his foreign policy debacles to reigniting the Cold War by reviving a pointless NATO. Biden has also reignited the Middle East conflicts by reviving the two-state lie of Yasser Arafat. Biden is even trying to turn the clock back to the Chinese civil war that put Mao in power.
Democrats and Republicans...
That's not the headline, is it?
The political narrative since Reagan is that Republicans never saw a war they didn't want to fight. Republicans have been the war mongers for over 40 years. Even following the aftermath of 9/11 Democrats could claim they were lied into supporting the invasion of Iraq.
But not this time. Democrats now own Biden's quagmires. We've witnessed an inflection point in Democrat politics.
I am really going to have to disagree on these points
the Cold war never ended in reality , as long as there are different ideologies and governments involved with nuclear capabilities it will never end . all that has happened since the fall of the USSR and the dissolution of the Warsaw pact , is a shuffling of the rosters on both sides . And frankly i wouldnt want to be in the russian governments shoes , if it were poker , they drew a real shitty hand and it wont win . They dont have the reliable allies they think they have . and frankly what supposed allies they have already know the russian word is not to be trusted as far as they could spit into the wind . That putin supporter that went by the handle "Tex" that joined the donbas regiment and accepted citizenship found that out the hard way , 7 shots in the head and decapitated by the "Russians" from what i read because he was viewed as being a spy......he made his choice , and was rewarded .
I also fail to see how NATO is pointless., seems many of the former warsaw pact nations dont think it was or is pointless otherwise they wouldnt have joined . way i see it NATO is a defensive agreement against non members aggression , most NATO members dont even belong to the "Nuclear Club ". but membership gives them a non nuclear option of Mutually assured destruction (MAD)of any aggressor or invader. And I think that pisses the ruskies and putinista appeasers right the f off. especially since its mostly their own grand duma member states of the former USSR that switched sides .
Anywho thats just my opinion .
Then explain Europe's difficulties banning Russian oil. There would never have been a Nord Stream pipeline during the Cold War. Russia had become a trading partner of Europe. European investors really were setting up manufacturing in Russia. And Russia really was trading with Europe. During the Cold War it would have been impossible to seize Russian assets in Europe. If the US Cold War policy of containment was still in place then Biden's sanctions were a pointless threat.
Then what is the point of the European Union? The European Union also includes establishing a mutual defense pact in its treaty. Note that there is also a solidarity clause that requires EU members to respond jointly to terrorist attacks and natural disasters. The European Union made NATO obsolete.
The European Union Treaty is what binds European countries together. And the EU treaty excludes the United States. The only thing NATO accomplishes within the structure of the EU is to give European countries access to the Federal treasury. If American taxpayers are going to underwrite the defense of the EU then guess who is going to laugh all the way to the bank.
I reeeeeally had to take a moment to stop laughing , i THOUGHT i had heard a lot of dumbfuckery spouted about politics , military strategy , alliances and the lot , BUT i will admit , that last post was in the top 3 of the most dumbfuck things i had ever read . and i read a lot coming out of putins troll mines on other sites .
Nato is a MILITARY alliance , EU is an economic alliance , not all members of NATO are members of the EU.. Some nice clauses in the EU agreements that are not part of the NATO ones , but those hardly made the military agreements under the NATO charter obsolete , Keep in mind , the US is NOT a EU member and those agreements dont apply. and if NATO were declared obsolete and disbanded , europe would lose whatever the US contributions is that would go to militarily defend the former NATO members .
Of course it made sense for the EU countries to attempt to make deals with Russia and the powers that be in the Kremlin and they likely would have continued to do so ... EXCEPT it didnt work out that way now did it ? Russia proved it was run by autocrats that held they were still living in the 19th and early 20th centurieswith shades of mongol domination Personally i think russia was of the mind they could blackmail europe with its fossil fuels , that didnt work , europe found other markets to get what they needed . Havent heard of anyone in europe going without heat this past winter , but SURE have heard of russians doing so .
I have read that Putin is considered the second coming of Stalin, so far from what i have seen he has been a knock off ringer . Maybe those european investors remember what Stalin did , got other countries business folks to come in , set up shop , build factories , start producing , and then nationalize the whole kit and caboodle under governmental control and kick the foreigners out, 2 us companies that happened to were general electri and ford motor company , good way to get an economy started , lousy for european interests that foot the bill.
Now you do have a point about NATO being a cash cow for european countries where the US is concerned , they do lease the land to the military (ie us Government) that the military is set up on and those funds come out of the military budget , not the US treasury , hell even bases here inside the states are leased from the states they are in , with applicable state property taxes paid Usually in a PILT payment negotiated every 10 years . hell military spending is an economy all its own .
Im going back to that NATO is obsolete....( had to stop laughing again ) well every single nato member that has joined since the dissolution of the USSR right up until today , would say you are wrong as rat shit in raisin bran . otherwise they wouldnt have joined , the last one was a neutral country since the 1600s, with its joining it turned the baltic sea into Lake NATO. Hell even tiny little switzerland took a side against russia and dropped their neutrality. shit putin pissed off the swiss.......every single one of those former soviet socialist republics know exactly the mindset they were dealing with and chose not to be assimmilated into some russian borg collective where they became the cannon fodder conscripts of the kremlin , you see without them , that big russian bear turns into a sarcastic bitter version of ted flipping of the thunder its so scared of , because without their thunder buddies , well their past accomplishments are not much to be proud of, or impressive ..
reminds me of the internet joke i see going around on the troll sites , Russian conscript gets leave and goes to see his wife , wife asks how the operation is going against NATO , conscript says its a tough fight we have lost many glorious warriors, wife asks how many have NATO lost? conscript says , they havent shown up yet ......
Now if your thinking , the US should become an isolationist nation , sorry that door closed the moment the nuclear genie was let out of its bottle , those days are never coming back .
Thank you Mark!