- US and European leaders have vowed Putin will pay for Alexey Navalny’s death.
- But it’s unclear how the somber moment will change the debate on Ukraine funding anytime soon.
- It’s likely that Ukraine supporters will have to continue their current slog through the House.
Leaders in both parties vowed that Russian President Vladimir Putin must pay for the death of famed opposition leader Alexey Navalny. It’s unclear though how their tributes will translate into tangible action, especially on Congress’ long-delayed push to send more aid for Ukraine’s defense.
House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a statement that international leaders “must be clear that Putin will be met with united opposition.” But so far, Johnson has signaled that he’s in no rush for the House to pass the Senate-led $95 billion aid package that former President Donald Trump and other conservatives oppose.
“As Congress debates the best path forward to support Ukraine, the United States, and our partners must be using every means available to cut off Putin’s ability to fund his unprovoked war in Ukraine and aggression against the Baltic states,” Johnson said in a statement.
While it’s true that the foreign aid bill could garner 218 votes, getting the bill on the floor is another matter entirely. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Georgia Republican, has threatened to use the same mechanism conservatives employed to boot then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy from power if Johnson passed more funding for Ukraine.
Some centrist Democrats have suggested they would protect Johnson if such a challenge were to arise, but a GOP speaker remaining in power with the help of Democrats would be a politically dicey reality.
Overcoming the House GOP opposition hasn’t and won’t be easy.
McCarthy also left another conundrum for his successor. The California Republican made two key concessions to end the deadlock that allowed him to rise to what became his historically brief speakership.
The first is now part of his political obituary — he allowed for any single lawmaker to raise a motion to vacate. Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Florida Republican, took this power and used it in a historic moment that saw McCarthy kicked out of leadership.
The other concession, stocking the powerful House Rules Committee with staunch conservatives, continues to plague the House. Effectively, as Axios reported earlier this year, it forces the House to pass almost any major legislation with two-thirds support or 290 votes, compared to a simple majority.
There are ways for Democrats and any supportive Republicans to blast through this de facto blockade. But there are costs to almost any procedural maneuver, and some require significant time. All, if Johnson remains opposed, would carry the political cost of asking the GOP to defy their leader and their colleagues. Trump, given his opposition to the Senate bill, would likely apply pressure too.
It’s why Matt Glassman, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Government Affairs Institute, has emphasized that the question is not if there is power available to 218 lawmakers if they want to pass Ukraine aid but whether all of those lawmakers are united in the extent of just how far they will push the issue.
“It’s absolutely true that 218 (or 216 right now) in the House can force something onto the floor,” Glassman wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, earlier this week. “You can’t stop them. But it’s only if they have no other political considerations. Hellbent.”
Centrist Republicans for the moment have said they are not ready to support efforts that undermine Johnson. A small bipartisan group of House lawmakers has proposed a slimmed-down $66.32 billion proposal that would pair the defense aid with a legislative push to enshrine the Trump-era “Remain in Mexico” policy into law. (Congress can’t recreate that policy on its own, the Mexican government would have to be involved.)
Congress has a long to-do list.
It’s not just the logistics that are difficult. Congress has lots of work after lawmakers return from their President’s Day recess.
The federal government will partially shut down on March 1 if more funding isn’t passed. Johnson’s idea of dual-track funding means another deadline will follow soon after. The same day of the second funding deadline, March 8, there’s another deadline for lawmakers to extend the FAA’s funding authority.
By mid-April, lawmakers must figure out the future of the controversial Section 702 spy powers. Congress is also behind on the massive legislation that funds farming and food assistance programs, though lawmakers punted that to this fall.
The greatest example that this moment won’t likely change anything came last year. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky came in December to make a last-minute plea to Congress to provide the funding his nation needs to repel Russia’s invasion. Schumer compared him to Churchill. While a top Senate Republican questioned if he even moved the needle.
Two months later, we know the answer. Ukraine aid still hasn’t passed.
