With Border Deal Doomed, Schumer Plans Test Vote on Ukraine and Israel Aid

With Border Deal Doomed, Schumer Plans Test Vote on Ukraine and Israel Aid


Senate Democrats plan to make a final attempt to salvage an aid bill for Ukraine and Israel on Wednesday, with Republicans expected to kill a version of the package that includes tough border security measures they had called for to be included .

Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader, said he plans to quickly vote on a standalone one after a critical test vote scheduled for early Wednesday afternoon in which Republicans are expected to block the border and Ukraine package Force bill That would send tens of billions of dollars in funding to Kiev and Israel.

“We will give them both options,” Mr. Schumer told reporters at the Capitol on Wednesday morning. “We’ll take one of these; We just hope they can get to a ‘yes’ vote on something.” He expressed confidence that the clean development aid law without border provisions would receive the necessary 60 votes to move forward.

A bipartisan group of senators had spent months negotiating a compromise that combined a Republican-demanded crackdown on migration to the United States with an emergency national security spending package that had been stalled for months.

But with Republicans balking at the immigration deal, the outcome of that vote was clear: It didn’t have the 60 votes it needed to advance. Anticipating his likely failure, Mr. Schumer said he told the White House and his caucus this week that he had a Plan B: If Republicans failed the bipartisan deal, he would immediately try to push through foreign aid without the border deal.

That led to Republicans potentially voting twice in one day to block the emergency national security bill, which would provide $60.1 billion in military aid to Ukraine, $14.1 billion in security aid to Israel and $10 billion Billions of dollars in humanitarian aid to civilians in global crises includes Palestinians and Ukrainians. Mr. Schumer described that outcome as an embarrassing prospect for a party reeling from a series of defeats.

However, to encourage Republicans to vote for the bill, Mr. Schumer said on Wednesday that there would be a “fair and open amendment process” that would allow them to propose changes to the bill.

Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, has been a vocal supporter of funding Ukraine.

“Make no mistake, a gauntlet has been thrown and America must pick it up,” McConnell said in a speech on the Senate floor this week, discussing the importance of sending money to Ukraine. He has traveled to Kiev to show his continued support for the war effort and has long been more concerned with sending foreign aid abroad than with passing an immigration package.

Mr. Schumer’s tactics could work if the national security spending package could attract 60 votes, which would require the support of at least 10 Republicans. If the bill passes the Senate, it would put pressure on Republican leaders to bring the bill up in the House, where it faces strong headwinds amid opposition from right-wing lawmakers to providing additional aid to Ukraine.

On Tuesday evening, the House of Representatives rejected a Republican-sponsored bill that would provide $17.6 billion in military aid only to Israel. Democrats criticized the bill as a political ploy to undermine efforts to pass a broader foreign military aid bill that also includes Ukraine.

“We’ll see what the Senate does; We are allowing the process to play out,” Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters Wednesday morning about whether he would consider a foreign aid bill before the House.

For Mr Johnson, there is pressure on both sides. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia, has threatened to oust him as speaker if he brings up any bill that includes funding for Ukraine.

Mr. Schumer offered his unsolicited advice to the inexperienced speaker on Wednesday, telling reporters: “It doesn’t look good on the speaker to block everything because 30 far-right people just want chaos, like Donald Trump does.”



Source link

2024-02-07 16:43:47

www.nytimes.com