Israel aid maneuver fuels Democratic fears about new House Speaker Mike Johnson
House Speaker Mike Johnson. Photo: Ronda Churchill/Bloomberg via Getty Images.
Democrats are taking House Speaker Mike Johnson's (R-La.) efforts to offset aid to Israel with funds from one of their signature pieces of legislation as an early sign that their initial fears about his speakership were well-founded.
Why it matters: The emergency Israel funding will need bipartisan support to become law — as will bills to support Ukraine and Taiwan, shore up border security and avert a government shutdown.
Driving the news: The supplemental appropriations package would offset $14.3 billion in military assistance to Israel by rescinding an equal amount in IRS funding from the Inflation Reduction Act.
- The rescission adds to Democratic frustration over Johnson's decision to try to pass Israel aid as a standalone bill, rather than tying it to Ukraine and Taiwan aid and border security funding.
- Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told reporters it would make the bill "much harder to pass" in the Senate.
What they're saying: Democratic lawmakers and aides told Axios they see the offset as a sign that Johnson plans to take a firmly partisan approach to governing as he steps into the speakership.
- "Obviously, we always want to give people the benefit of the doubt when they step into leadership positions, but this is totally ridiculous," said Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.).
- One senior House Democrat called the rescission "very problematic" and said it "doesn't seem like this is a good start for the new speaker."
- "Instead of introducing a clean aid package … the new Republican Speaker has chosen to put a poison pill" in the bill, said Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.). "The politicizing of Israel in a time of war is nothing short of disgraceful."
A spokesperson for Johnson did not respond to a request for comment.
Zoom in: Raising Democrats' ire even further is the fact that the rescission would cut against Republicans' stated goal of saving as much money as they spend by dampening tax collection enforcement and thus diminishing federal revenue. . .
The story continues
No comments:
Post a Comment