Speaker Johnson’s two-part spending plan deserves support
Quin Hillyer
Video Embed
House Speaker Mike Johnson is on the right track in his Nov. 11 proposal to temporarily continue government funding in two pieces, with a tighter deadline for full-term funding for the easier parts of the budget.
Johnson’s two-part continuing resolution would extend current levels of funding for Agriculture, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Energy and Water until January 19, with the agencies covered by the eight other “Appropriations” categories extended until Feb. 2. This goes along with Johnson’s pledge next year to pass each of the 12 annual Appropriations bills one at a time and to finish each of them before the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year, so as to avoid a repeat of the massive year-end budgetary pile-up that has happened almost annually for decades.
SPEAKER JOHNSON PROPOSES ‘TWO-PART’ PLAN TO FINANCE GOVERNMENT
That second promise is easier said than done, but it is achievable. Just to make it such a prominent public pledge is a good start, because imposing discipline usually involves laying down a marker, a firm goal, to begin with.
The first proposal – the two-tiered approach to keeping the government from shutting down on Nov. 17, when the prior spending extension expires – uses some of the same logic as the longer-term pledge. Namely, it makes more sense to break projects down into bite-sized chunks than to insist on all-or-nothing propositions. If Congress can find agreement on a third of the government’s annual “discretionary” spending, well, why not at least get that third done and then work on the other two-thirds separately?
Johnson does not, however, want to include so-called “supplemental” spending for Ukraine or the Mexican border in either of these packages of ordinary appropriations. While this obviously is cause for concern for those of us who want the U.S. to provide strong support military support to the victims of Russia’s evil aggression, the logic is the same: By handling each item separately, the Speaker makes it harder for Members to vote against everything just because they oppose something, some smaller portion, in the whole package. It’s easier to build a coalition for smaller chunks individually than for a massive contraption with too many moving parts.
That said, Johnson is extremely remiss if he does not do a Ukrainian package first, before midweek. With a long record of voting against Ukrainian aid, his recent statements in favor of Ukraine are naturally a bit suspect. The best way to engender trust on all the bigger spending items is to let a majority of the House works its will against naked aggression and rape by Russia. If he passes Ukrainian aid first, via a fair majority vote, Johnson will earn confidence from all sides that he isn’t just playing cynical games.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
It is true that budget hawks will be unhappy at even temporarily keeping spending at current levels rather than cutting it, but they must learn that incrementalism works. Congress usually hikes spending each year, so just keeping it at a steady level rather than raising it is a step in the right direction of fiscal discipline. Plus, as Johnson is new to the Speakership, it would be incredibly counter-productive for his Republican colleagues to kneecap him just as he is getting his feet on the ground. For the House to work, and for Republicans to stop turning voters off with their constant chaos, Johnson needs room to operate.
It’s time to stop insisting on perfection. And time to stop the air of crisis. Johnson has outlined a reasonable step forward. Individual representatives should stop being prima donnas, and instead walk ahead with their new Speaker.