The fight over Ukraine funding has run into a fresh roadblock in the Senate as Republicans eye cuts to the nonmilitary portions of the aid.
President Joe Biden made a $106 billion funding request in the fall, largely for Ukraine but also for Israel and Taiwan. The supplemental is geared toward security assistance as war rages in Europe and the Middle East, but it also includes nonlethal aid.
The legislation, released by the Senate Appropriations Committee in December, would allocate $12 billion in “direct budget support” for the Ukrainian government, plus $2 billion in economic assistance. Another $10 billion would go toward humanitarian aid in Ukraine, Gaza, and elsewhere.
Senate leadership is broadly supportive of Ukraine aid, even if conservative members want to cut off funding entirely. But Sen. John Thune (R-SD), the Senate minority whip, made clear on Tuesday the conference is exploring whether the non-military portions can be reduced.
“There are folks, obviously myself included, who would like to see that number pared back,” he told the Washington Examiner.
“I think anything that doesn’t deal with lethal aid, with military aid, are areas that should be subject to at least discussion,” he added.
Until now, the battle over Ukraine funding has centered on the border. Republicans have blocked the supplemental from moving forward unless Democrats agree to “credible” policy changes amid a record influx of immigrants.
Disagreement over the Ukraine portion itself opens up yet another point of conflict.
Democrats questioned the wisdom of cutting nonlethal assistance on Tuesday, warning that morale on the front lines would suffer if Ukrainian fighters had to worry about their families receiving basic services like electricity and education.
“Are we going to stand for Ukraine or not?” asked Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE). “I’m old enough to remember when Republicans cared about pushing back on Russian aggression, and many, particularly in leadership, demonstrably still do, strongly, but for us to be willing to send billions in weapons but nothing to keep their government running, to keep their society functioning, would be short-sighted in the extreme.”
Republicans at this point are hardly drawing a red line like they have over the border, and Coons, chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee that deals with humanitarian assistance, predicted Republican leadership would ultimately lend “robust support” to Ukraine’s “operating needs.”
But the desire to shrink the size of the total bill is the latest wrinkle in the legislation’s already tenuous path through Congress.
The Republican push for border reforms is partly about leverage. With Biden’s foreign policy agenda on the line, the White House and Senate Democrats have come to the table to negotiate a set of changes to immigration law.
But it’s also about getting the bill through the Republican-led House, where Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has pledged to reject further Ukraine funding without “meaningful” border policy changes.
Cutting the nonlethal portion is not going to win over the supplemental’s biggest critics, who have grown weary of the conflict with Russia as it enters its third year. “I’d like to see it pared down to zero,” Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) said of Ukraine aid.
Yet a smaller price tag would make the supplemental more politically palatable in Congress. “I think we’re living in a moment where less is better, and less is more likely to succeed,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND).
The willingness to sacrifice economic aid specifically is partially due to the sense that Europe can offset some of the cost burden when it comes to rebuilding Ukraine’s infrastructure.
“It doesn’t seem as urgent, and it doesn’t quite have the same cachet,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), the former Republican majority whip. “There are other countries in the region that need to continue to step up, the EU and NATO countries in particular.”
The appetite for a smaller supplemental only extends so far, however. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), the ranking Republican on the Appropriations Committee, expressed openness to paring back assistance to Ukraine’s government but warned of catastrophic consequences if it is removed altogether.
“We can start putting it on a glide path, we could reduce it somewhat, or we could use it for other issues that Ukraine is dealing with,” she said, “but I think terminating that would be the equivalent of terminating the Zelensky government.”
Meanwhile, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), the top Republican on the Armed Services Committee, told the Washington Examiner he is not supportive of cutting economic assistance.
Ironically, the hiccup comes as negotiators close in on a border deal that would likely include changes to asylum and a new expulsion authority for the president. The sticking point remains parole, an authority Republicans say the White House has abused to admit hundreds of thousands of immigrants.
A possible compromise on the issue has run into vocal opposition from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC). Nevertheless, border negotiators remain hopeful that the bill text could be released as soon as this week.
Part of the delay is figuring out the cost of that legislative compromise. “When you’re talking about increasing the beds, increasing deportation flights, increasing staff, all that has a cost that’s going to it, and right now, it’s going through all the CBO and the appropriations scoring, figuring out how to do that,” said Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), the chief Republican negotiator.
If a deal is reached, it could take weeks to socialize the agreement with members and move it through the Senate. And Lankford conceded there could be “sticker shock” with the total cost of the border provisions.
The Appropriations Committee does not yet have a handle on what that number will be. Collins noted that appropriators are still waiting on the final text. “How it’s worded makes a big difference,” she said.
In the meantime, Senate leadership is anxious to bring the bill to the floor. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) hoped the first procedural step could begin this week, but that appears increasingly unlikely without a deal in hand.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“We’re close to reaching a bipartisan agreement on the supplemental, but we are not there yet,” he said on Tuesday. “Negotiators are still working through some outstanding items.”
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), the lead Democratic negotiator in border talks, said the bill text would need to be released by Wednesday for the Senate to have a chance to consider the bill before the week is out.
