Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is fully committed to a substantial package of foreign aid, which has split his party and put his leadership in jeopardy, dismissing his critics in a determined attempt to support struggling allies overseas.
Johnson has garnered early Democratic support for his multifaceted strategy to send military help to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan, which is supported by a broad package of Republican national security priorities aimed at appeasing hesitant conservatives in the House GOP. He promises to have separate votes on all four components before the end of the week.
However, the plan drew immediate criticism from hardliners in his conference, including spending hawks who don’t want to add billions to the national debt; isolationists who want to focus Washington’s resources on domestic problems; and a broad spectrum of rank-and-file Republicans who have demanded that the legislation include tougher border security—aa notable omission from the Speaker’s policy blueprint.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), a regular critic of the Speaker, has already presented a motion to remove him from power—a resolution that hangs over the next Ukraine votes, waiting for Greene to bring it to the floor. That danger grew more serious Tuesday when Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican with a libertarian leaning, said he would back Johnson’s removal if Greene’s resolution was activated.
“Mike Johnson’s going for the Triple Crown here against our base,” Massie said in a statement. “He voted for an omnibus that spends more than Nancy Pelosi. He has placed his finger on the scales to pass the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act without warrants. And now he’s planning to go to Ukraine without defending the American border.
“Those are like three strikes.”
The heightened threat has highlighted Johnson’s shaky grip on the House GOP, where diverse ideological factions have been at odds throughout the 118th Congress. Rebellious conservatives have already deposed one Speaker for ignoring their demands, and the GOP’s razor-thin majority leaves little room for error.
Still, Johnson received a significant boost last week when he visited with former President Trump at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s home property, where the probable presidential nominee praised the besieged Speaker for “doing a very good job.”
Johnson himself has dismissed the ouster attempt, calling it “absurd” and “not helpful.”
“I’m not concerned about this. “I am going to do my job, and I believe that is what the American people expect from us,” he stated.
Despite the rumblings, he may have little to worry about—at least in the short term.
Massie has stated that he does not intend to bring a motion-to-vacate resolution to the floor himself. And Greene, who had previously stated that floor action on Ukraine would cause her to push a vote, appeared to soften her tone this week.
While openly criticizing Johnson for breaching his commitments, notably on the border, Greene also stated that she is treading carefully as she chooses whether to bring her expulsion resolution to the floor—a decision complicated by Trump’s positive appraisal of the Speaker.
“We’re discussing it.” Let’s see what happens. But I believe a request to vacate is incredibly serious, so I’m trying to be very careful about it,” Greene added.
Johnson’s hesitancy has given him some leeway as he tries to get the foreign aid bills through the House this week. And he’s getting early support from Democrats, who appear to be on board with the four-vote strategy—aas long as the policy provisions don’t deviate too far from the Senate’s $95 billion aid package, which included aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan as well as humanitarian assistance for Gaza and other global hotspots.
“If it’s just chopping them all up, I think it’ll pass—as long as they don’t put any poison pills in it,” remarked Rep. Juan Vargas (D-Calif.).
“If it gets us unstuck, it’s a good thing,” added Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.).
The Republican response to the foreign aid package has been multifaceted—and more convoluted. On the one hand, conservatives applaud Johnson’s decision to hold an amendment process and divide the priorities into four measures, which will allow them to support the proposals they like and oppose the ones they dislike.
However, those hardliners have criticized the removal of border security as well as the inclusion of a provision that will merge the four measures into a single package before being sent to the Senate—a combination of drawbacks that appear to outweigh the positives.
Johnson is also refusing to allow any border-related amendments, which is fueling conservative discontent.
“I am fine with putting certain subjects on the floor.” But if it’s all prearranged and you’re going to leave the border off, you’ve defeated the entire purpose of the struggle. Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) told reporters Tuesday that he reminded the Speaker—aand this is public knowledge—tthat he emphasized the border first before Ukraine several times in the previous six months.
“He is not going to allow border security to be part of the package,” said Freedom Caucus chair Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.). “That’s a big, big problem.”
Despite rising irritation, no additional Republicans have emerged to support Greene and Massie’s motion to vacate, while several are keeping their cards close to their breasts.
When asked about the ousting attempt, Roy told reporters he’s “not going to talk about that.” Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), a former Freedom Caucus chair, did not rule it out, stating “we’re not anywhere close to that” when pressed.
Meanwhile, a huge number of Republicans have spoken out strongly against the removal effort. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), leader of the House Judiciary Committee, described the effort as “a total waste of time and an absolutely ridiculous concept,” while Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.) predicted it would fail.
Massie, for his part, believes the effort to remove Johnson will receive more support than McCarthy’s expulsion, which had eight Republicans and all Democrats on board.
“If it were called today, he would lose the vote, and I believe he would lose more than Kevin McCarthy,” said the Kentucky Republican on Tuesday.
“It’s not just the right flank of the conference that is upset with him—we’ve devolved into ‘Lord of the Flies,'” he said. “There is no order. For example, the rules are being relaxed. There are no consequences for chaos.
“I don’t think his life experiences have equipped him for this job.”
