A Decision to Make: House Speaker Mike Johnson’s government funding bill divides Republicans

It was just minutes after the House finally ended a three-week battle, culminating in the election of House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., last fall. The House voted to dethrone former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. But not before burning through three other Speaker candidates.

I asked a senior House Republican aide what would be different with Johnson at the helm.

The response?

Different Speaker. Same members.

CONTINGENT ELECTIONS: WHAT THEY ARE, AND WHAT TO EXPECT IF 2024 TRIGGERS ONE

Which brings us to where we stand nearly a year later amid the annual gymnastics to avert a government shutdown by October 1.

On late Wednesday morning, Johnson yanked his plan which would fund the government until late March – and mandate that people prove they are citizens in order to vote. Some lawmakers opposed the lengthy interim spending plan, renewing all spending at current levels for another six months. But others had issues with latching the citizenship provision to the spending package. It’s believed that Johnson was 20–30 votes shy to pass the measure. It’s not an emergency – yet. Congress has two-and-a-half more weeks before the deadline.

So what did Congress accomplish this week? Nothing. In fact, the week only emphasized deep divides among Republicans.

Different Speaker. Same members.

“We’re going to continue to work on this,” said Johnson Wednesday after pulling the bill. “I want any Member of Congress in either party to explain to the American people why we should not ensure that only U.S. citizens are voting in U.S. elections.”

So, no vote this week. And whether Johnson is able to massage the issue in a way that the bill passes is anyone’s guess. Earlier in the week, Johnson flashed confidence that he could avoid a government shutdown, claiming “there is no fallback position. This is a righteous fight.”

Had Johnson taken the bill to the floor Wednesday, it would have gone down to defeat. After all, there was “no fallback position.” Then the Senate may have stuck Johnson with a short-term bill which runs until November or December. Johnson would have no bargaining chip. By delaying the fight, Johnson hopes to prove to his right flank that he’s fighting. And, he’s also trying to impress former President Trump. On Tuesday, Mr. Trump posted to Truth Social that the GOP should “close it down” unless they received “absolute assurances on Election security.”

But some conservatives wondered just how committed Johnson was to the combo funding/proof of citizenship bill. Johnson archnemesis and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., generally opposes the concept of a temporary spending plan, known as a “Continuing Resolution “or “CR.”

SENATE TO SWEAR IN MENENDEZ SUCCESSOR FOLLOWING NJ LAWMAKER’S CONVICTION, RESIGNATION

“What is Speaker Johnson going to do? Is he willing to fight for this? And if he’s not willing to fight for it, why would we vote for it?” asked Greene. “Otherwise, it’s pointless. It’s really a waste of everyone’s time.”

Many conservatives expected a two-step from Johnson. Put out a spending plan with a poison pill which would delight the right – and maybe even former President Trump. But face doom in the Senate. The question then is would Johnson get jammed with a “clean” bill from the Democratically-controlled Senate? Or would he eventually team up with Democrats to pass a bill to avert a government shutdown? Those options are anathema to many on the right.

The fact that former President Trump waded into the fight worries some House Republicans.

“I disagree with President Trump on the shutdown. We have a very slim margin in the House of Representatives. And I will tell you, I do think that a shutdown of the government has the potential to shift enough seats in the House of Representatives races that we have the potential to lose the House,” said Rep. Austin Scott, R-Ga., on Fox Business. “If we lose the House of Representatives, if you have a Democrat Speaker with President Trump as president, and we’ve seen what happens with that. The Democrats would simply sabotage his presidency.”

Republican presidential nominee, former U.S. President Donald Trump participates in a Fox News Town Hall with Sean Hannity at the New Holland Arena on September 04, 2024, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Democrats believed the stumble was emblematic of how Republicans struggled to run the House – be it under the tutelage of Johnson or McCarthy.

“I think this Republican majority is, has demonstrated over the last two years that they are unable to govern. They are unable to keep their party together. They’re unable to hold power together. And they’re not even able to compromise amongst themselves. Let alone with Democrats,” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.

Some Republicans viewed Johnson’s strategy as a fig leaf. It would constitute a “show” vote with no real ramifications for this fall’s elections. Especially with early voting starting now.

“There’s no implementation that could be made in the next 53, 54-plus days that’s going to impact our federal election laws. So to say that this as an attachment to CR is somehow going to do something is a farce,” fumed Rep. Cory Mills, R-Fla.

REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK: WHY FOREIGN POLICY MIGHT MATTER

Bipartisan defense hawks opposed the plan because it freezes all spending until March. The Pentagon scores more than half of all money Congress allocates annually. So the biggest benefactor of Congressional appropriations gets hit the hardest under this scheme.

“(The military) can’t start programs. They can’t end programs. It’s just a horrible idea to put DoD in that position,” said Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., the ranking Democrat on Armed Services Committee.

Republicans appear divided into multiple camps: Those who want a longer interim spending bill and the proof of citizenship provision attached. Those who want a shorter spending bill, but maintain the proof of voting mandate. Then there are the defense hawks who worry about how a lengthy Band-Aid spending plan imperils the military. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Ala., shares the same concerns as Adam Smith. There are others like Cory Mills who believe the voting language is a smokescreen and not practicable. Some like Greene believe the voting provision is mere camouflage – and Johnson will buckle later. Finally, a small group of conservatives just opposes any sort of interim spending bill at all.

So you see the challenge.

But despite the impasse, Republicans are able to champion “election security” as a campaign issue. That plays to the MAGA base and former President Trump. Moreover, talk about election security is code for problems at the porous U.S. border. So that speaks to certain Republican voters, too.

Former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) answers questions during a press conference at the U.S. Capitol on January 09, 2020, in Washington, DC.  (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Democrats countered the assertion that persons illegally in the country were voting.

“I think there’s been five documented cases. This is clearly not a big issue. It’s a political issue,” said House Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chairwoman and Rep. Nanette Barragan, D-Calif.

“Noncitizen voting is extremely rare,” said Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon, D-Penn.

But Johnson must wage a fight over this. Many Republicans insist that he do so. So does former President Trump. And if Johnson doesn’t, the phantasm of Kevin McCarthy lurks in the Congressional corridors.

There is only one way to avert a government shutdown on October 1: pass a bill with a mixture of Democrats and Republicans. Everyone at the Capitol knows this. But such a move might not be good for Johnson.

Republicans are also getting itchy to go home and campaign. The House is scheduled to remain in session through September 27. It was thought the House might be able to complete its work and skip town by September 20. That’s not on the table now.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

So what will happen?

It’s about the math. It hinges on which group of Republicans is larger: those who want to go home and campaign or those who want to fight over election security. Different Speaker. Same members. And they have a decision to make.