Thanks to Speaker Johnson, Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan will get the aid they need to remain strong in the face of powerful adversaries who want to literally end their existence and take over their territory.
The respective vote counts demonstrated why putting them into a single legislative package – and including immigration reform – has been a loser. As a four-issue deal, the package approach contained poison pills that were unacceptable to specific groups. Hence the packaged legislation could not get a majority.
The only logical and sane thing to do is to vote on them as separate bills in which a bipartisan majority can prevail in each case. After all, they ARE very different issues with strong crosscurrent constituencies.
It would have been wonderful if somehow immigration reform could have been tied to one of the bills as a trade off, but that is too different. The three aid packages deal in foreign policy and American national interests and security on the international stage. Immigration reform – while posing a threat to American stability and security – is more of a domestic issue. The fact that it was not part of the defense spending trifecta does not make it any less critical. That legislative battle is currently ongoing.
We now see how the various parties and factions have expressed their opinions in the form of a vote. The aid to Taiwan was relatively uncontroversial – and it was tied to banning TikTok and imposing sanctions on China. All of that had widespread bipartisan support.
It was the aid to Israel and Ukraine that exposed the deep divisions within the Republican and Democratic parties.
I personally found the vote on the Israel and Ukraine bills to be disappointing – even shocking. In my view, both of those measures should have had the support of every right-thinking and patriotic American legislator. Unfortunately, both received significant opposition that reflected the relative division within the major parties. Of course, those divisions were what made it impossible to pass the aid as a package.
Israel
Democrats supported the aid to Israel measure with 137 yea votes. However, there were 37 nays. The latter were the hardcore Democrats who carry the banner – figuratively and in some cases literally – for the Palestinian Hamas propaganda campaign. They have turned their back on America’s strongest and longest ally in the Middle East under the false belief that the Hamas/Israeli war is some sort of unprovoked aggression by Israel.
They claim their concern is merely humanitarian, but the most prominent leaders voting against aid to Israel have held anti-Israel antisemitic positions since arriving in Congress. They have been promoters of the BDS (boycott, divest and sanction) Movement against Israel. That is literally a call to wipe Israel off the map. Some members of the anti-Israel coalition have marched alongside those chanting “death to Israel,” and have taken up the war cry to have Israel wiped out “from river to sea.”
Ukraine
In terms of aid to Ukraine, it was the Republicans who divided on the issue – with 101 House members voting in favor and 112 members voting against. That was a surprise to me. I find it hard to believe that a majority of the GOP caucus would have opposed the measure. I was thinking maybe 10 to 20 nay votes.
As with Israel, aiding Ukraine in its fight against Russian imperialism is not only the right thing to do morally, but it is clearly in the interest of the United States to prevent Putin from aiding another nation – with all its resources – to his vision of world dominance.
The division in the Republican ranks has developed into an effort to oust Speaker Johnson. That adds political insanity on top of moral incertitude.
If the effort to vacate the chair fails. It will only be because some Democrats will vote against such a motion – and Johnson will remain speaker. That does not benefit Republicans in any way. First of all, a vote to vacate the chair is politically damaging enough. Should that succeed and put the country through another long effort to elect a new Speaker, irreparable harm will befall the GOP. It would certainly diminish Republican chances of maintaining control of the House.
If, on the other hand, Democrats help Johnson maintain the speakership, it will only happen with concession to the Democrat agenda — and essentially set up a quasi-coalition governing force in the House.
In either case – Democrats save Johnson, or he is ousted – the outcome is not good for the GOP in the upcoming election. And the damage in voter confidence would spill over to the Senate, the presidency and major offices across the nation.
Summary
The adage that a house divided cannot stand has real meaning. The divisions in the nation and in the respective parties are damaging — and the votes on aid to Israel and Ukraine are prime examples. Factions within the two major parties are threatening their own party’s election prospects. Already, the Democrats’ anti-Israel faction is threatening Biden’s reelection.
The division among House Republicans is threatening their chances in 2024, including Trump’s ability to return to the White House.
The aid issue reflects the status of the presidential race today. Which side is more unpopular and more damaged? Apart from a small base, most voters will be making their decision on who they dislike and distrust the most. Will they be more turned off by the Democrats’ anti-Israel faction or the Republicans’ anti-Ukraine faction?
It is such an ugly choice that millions of voters may choose not to choose. Many will stay home … or skip the presidential spot on the ballot … or vote for a third party.
A house divided cannot stand, and that is why we see American influence and respect waning on the global stage. Our allies do not trust American leadership because it is not evident. Our enemies do not fear American power because it is not evident.
By the time you read this, it is possible that the Senate will approve the aid bills with some of the same division.
The vote on the aid bills again shows that America is a house divided – and the American people are justifiably saying “a plague on both houses.”
So, there ‘tis.