House Votes Against Speaker Johnson's Govt Spending Bill
By a vote of 220-202, the US House voted against House Speaker Mike Johnson's (R-La) proposed six-month federal government funding bill. Of the 220 who voted against, most were Democrats, though 14 Republicans joined them and two Republicans voted present....
0:00
/1861
Facts
- By a vote of 220-202, the US House voted against House Speaker Mike Johnson's (R-La) proposed six-month federal government funding bill. Of the 220 who voted against, most were Democrats, though 14 Republicans joined them and two Republicans voted present.[1][2]
- The temporary funding bill, known as a stopgap bill, is valued at $1.6T and includes a provision called the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which would implement new proof-of-citizenship requirements for voter registration.[3][4]
- The Republicans who oppose the bill include fiscal conservatives, who don't believe in stopgap funding, as well as military hawks like Armed Services Chairman Mike Rogers, (R-Ala.), who believes the six-month timeline of the bill risks leaving the military unfunded for too long.[5]
- Other Republicans appear cynical about the process, such as Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who accused Johnson of 'fake fighting' with Democrats, further asserting that the House Speaker will 'later abandon' the SAVE Act and continue on a 'path of destructive spending.'[4]
- The Democrats, meanwhile, are looking for a three-month funding bill and, alongside their colleagues in the Senate, are opposed to the SAVE Act provision.[1]
- As the Sept. 30 government funding deadline approaches, after which the government would shut down, Johnson faces calls from several Republicans, including Donald Trump, to keep the SAVE Act in place. However, the majority-Democrat Senate is unlikely to agree to that.[6][1]
Sources: [1]Washington Post, [2]Wsj, [3]New York Times, [4]FOX News, [5]NBC and [6]New York Post.
Narratives
- Republican narrative, as provided by Youtube. While some Republicans have differing opinions on certain things, the party is very much in agreement on the issue of election security. The real problem is that Senate Democrats haven't brought appropriations bills to the floor, which, alongside the House Democrats refusing to ban illegal immigrants from voting, leaves the government stuck in limbo.
- Democratic narrative, as provided by The New Republic. Since Republicans know that noncitizens don't actually vote, what other reason could they have for pushing this? One of the most horrific possibilities is that if the passport and/or birth certificate ID rules were imposed, millions of women who don't have a passport and whose maiden name doesn't match their married name could be banned from voting. These machinations are quite possibly leading to a government shutdown.
