Democratic leaders embrace Johnson’s Ukraine strategy but want political details

House Democratic leaders said Tuesday they are ready to embrace House Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) strategy of breaking down an emergency foreign aid package into specific parts, but first they want assurances that all components of a bill approved by the Senate are part of the agreement.

Democrats have for weeks been pushing Johnson to vote on the Senate’s $95 billion package, which combines military aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan with humanitarian assistance to Gaza and other global hotspots.

But this week, after Johnson announced his plan to vote on those four provisions separately, Democratic leaders said they are ready to get on board — if all the key elements of the Senate package are included.

“The important point is the substance of the legislation. The substance is important,” Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), chairman of the Democratic Party, told reporters on Capitol Hill.

“We hope to be able to reach an agreement today on exactly what will be included,” repeated Representative Katherine Clark (Mass.), the Democratic leader.

Democrats are waiting for Johnson to release the precise details of his plan, expected on Tuesday. At that point, Aguilar said, several top Democrats — including the heads of the Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Appropriations committees — will review the four bills to ensure they pass the substance “test” that merits Democratic support.

“If these individuals indicate that the substance of the legislation that we are talking about meets that test to help Ukraine, to help our allies, to provide humanitarian assistance, then House Democrats and the leadership team will work to find the appropriate process to deliver this,” Aguilar said.

“We’re more concerned about the substance at this point than the process.”

That message marks a shift for Democratic leaders, who had insisted for weeks that Johnson vote specifically for the Senate bill, which passed the upper chamber in February with a resounding bipartisan vote of 70 to 29. Anything less, they said, would would be causing undue delay at a time of urgent need.

“We continue to make clear that the only path forward is an up-or-down vote on the bipartisan, comprehensive national security bill passed by the Senate,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (DN.Y.) said on Tuesday. last week.

Democrats’ openness to Johnson’s alternative strategy recognizes the political dilemmas the President faces as he seeks to introduce the foreign aid package through a fractious GOP conference, where dozens of conservatives oppose key parts of the Senate bill.

It also reflects the urgency of the situations in Ukraine, where Kiev’s beleaguered forces are said to be low on ammunition, and in Israel, which was attacked by Iranian missile strikes over the weekend.

Some Democrats have criticized Johnson’s four-vote plan, expressing concerns that it offers no guarantees that less popular proposals will reach President Biden’s desk.

“I don’t think it’s a good thing,” said Rep. Tony Cardenas (D-Calif.). “I think they’re going to leave us out to dry on some components. We need to make a supplement that is comprehensive.”

However, some liberal Democrats are actually welcoming Johnson’s piecemeal strategy, which will allow them to vote against parts of the Senate package they opposed: namely, offensive weapons for Israel.

“I think it’s important that all of this not be lumped together,” said Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas). “I am a big supporter of aid to Ukraine. I also firmly believe that I do not want to be complicit in Benjamin Netanyahu’s policies.”

In an effort to make the legislation more appealing to wary conservatives, Johnson and his leadership team have adjusted their messaging with a new emphasis on the billions of dollars that will go toward resupplying U.S. weapons.

“The majority of this money — at least two-thirds of it — is money that is actually used to replenish American stockpiles and American weapons systems,” House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) said on Tuesday. Monday. “So it’s not money that would go to Ukraine.”

That message has done little to appease many Republican Party hardliners, who are furious that Johnson — after insisting for months that any aid to Ukraine must be accompanied by tougher security measures on the U.S. southern border — abandoned that demand by reveal your foreign aid plan. Fueling conservative discontent, Johnson is also not allowing any border-related changes.

“I’m fine with putting individual issues on the floor as a matter of course,” said Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas). “But when everything is predetermined and will leave the border aside, then you have given up the whole point of the fight.”

Democrats, meanwhile, appear more concerned that GOP leaders are skimping on humanitarian aid, especially in Gaza, where Israeli attacks have killed more than 34,000 people.

The Senate bill provided $9.2 billion for food, medical supplies and other humanitarian aid to Gaza, Ukraine and other global hotspots. Many Democrats said Tuesday morning that they are prepared to oppose any foreign aid package that falls below that number.

“If they bring aid to Gaza and all the other places that need help, that will be a poison pill,” said Rep. Juan Vargas (D-Calif.). “We need humanitarian help on this.”

“If Speaker Johnson’s version is missing one of these components, it is highly unlikely that Democrats will support it,” echoed Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Vice Chairman of the Caucus.

Johnson is planning to bring all four bills to the floor under a single rule. If they all pass, he will recombine them into a single package to send to the Senate.

This strategy will likely present the Speaker with an initial problem: How to pass the rule, given that some conservatives are likely to oppose it to block a vote on the underlying bills?

The answer may be that he will have to rely on the Democratic minority to pass the rule and bring the four bills to a vote – a highly unusual scenario, but one that Democratic leaders are not ruling out.

“There is no option off the table at this time, from procedural measures that take this directly to the plenary, to any votes that are options,” Aguilar said.

“We don’t want to sink any plan that provides any help to our allies,” he said.

Mychael Schnell contributed.