House Democrats wasted no time this week rejecting Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) demands for strict new border security measures in return for Ukraine aid, posing the latest obstacle in Congress’s efforts to move another round of military assistance for the embattled U.S. ally.
Johnson said Wednesday House Republicans would oppose any new aid for Kyiv unless it was accompanied by major provisions of the GOP’s previously passed border bill, including the reinstallation of the “remain in Mexico” policy, begun under former President Trump, and hundreds of miles of new wall construction on the U.S.-Mexico border.
“That border fight is coming, and we’re going to die on that hill,” he told the conservative radio pundit Hugh Hewitt.
The remarks sparked an immediate backlash from House Democrats, who are supportive of new border security funding, but not the tough immigration restrictions favored by Republicans. They’re vowing to sink any Ukraine package that includes those provisions if Johnson brings it to the floor — a notable threat since Democratic votes would be needed to move the bill.
“That would be ridiculous. Unfortunately it would be to the detriment of Ukraine if they did that,” Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) said.
The border wall, in particular, has been a topic of fierce debate between the parties in recent years, and Johnson’s proposal was quickly panned by Democrats, who warned that they’ll never back a Ukraine package that included anything close to the 900 miles of new construction featured in the Republicans border bill.
“That’s a non-starter for me, and I think for most of us,” Rep. Juan Vargas (D-Calif.) said.
“I don’t think it’s realistic,” echoed Rep. Bennie Thompson (Miss.), the senior Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee.
Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) went a step further, accusing Republicans of offering pseudo-solutions to highly complex problems for the sole purpose of stirring up nativist voters.
“That wall’s always been about political symbolism for Republicans, and it continues to be that,” Grijalva said. “The fact that it has failed, the fact that it costs money — wastes money — seems to be irrelevant.
“I think it’s just the same rhetoric from the last 10 years.”
The dispute over the appropriate response to the southern border crisis — and Johnson’s demands more specifically — have created just the latest hurdle in the months-long effort to get more military aid to Ukraine, which is reeling after almost two years under invasion by Russian forces and warning that supplies are dwindling.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky visited Capitol Hill in December to warn leaders in both parties of the perils facing his country — and the urgency underlying the additional aid. But the Senate negotiators scrambling to piece together a Ukraine-border security package have been unable to reach an agreement. And even if they do, it will face a much tougher road in the House, where a large and growing number of Republicans have grown wary of the long-running conflict and are vowing to oppose any new U.S. aid for Kyiv.
The issue is posing an enormous headache for Johnson, who supports another round of Ukraine funding, and not even his demand for tough new border restrictions seems to be changing the dynamic.
“No more funding for Ukraine. And that’s where I am completely different right now than the Speaker and others in my conference,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) said Thursday. “If he wants to give $60 billion in a deal with Democrats trading America’s border security, then he’s gonna find himself in deep trouble not only with me, but other conservatives in our conference and conservatives across America.”
Under former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), House GOP leaders staged a test vote on Ukraine funding last September, and a majority of Republicans had opposed it — a significant development given that GOP leaders typically adhere by the “Hastert Rule,” avoiding any legislation that lacks the support of most of their conference.
The issue was among the reasons cited by Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) when he launched the successful effort to oust McCarthy, and Johnson is now facing the same pressures from conservatives fighting to slash federal spending in the name of deficit reduction.
“I don’t even want to fund my government if the administration won’t secure the border, let alone fund Ukraine’s government in exchange for defending America,” Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) said Thursday in an interview with CNN.
Given the conservative unrest, some Democrats are speculating that Johnson is seeking to scuttle the new Ukraine funding by linking it to immigration provisions he knows Democrats will reject. That strategy would not only allow the Speaker to avoid a ferocious internal fight, but also provide him the political advantage of blaming the impasse on Democrats.
“The Republicans are throwing the Ukrainians to the dogs,” Vargas said. “It’s sad; I think it’s a horrible situation, but that’s what I think they’re doing.”
Rep. Henry Cuellar, a centrist Blue Dog Democrat who represents a Texas border district, noted that Trump had made similar promises about border security and achieved only a small fraction of the new wall construction he sought. House Republicans, Cueller said, will have similar success pushing for 900 additional miles.
“I don’t think it’s realistic at all,” Cuellar said. “It’s people, with all due respect, that don’t understand the border that usually come up with the most interesting solutions for the border.”
Mychael Schnell contributed reporting.