Johnson Defies Biden on Ukraine and Border Deal

Plus, child poverty rebounds ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ [The Fisc](   By Yuval Rosenberg and Michael Rainey Good Wednesday evening! Here's what's happening. Johnson spoke to reporters after his White House meeting. (Reuters) Johnson Sticks to Hard Line as Biden Presses for a Deal on Ukraine and Border President Joe Biden met with congressional leaders at the White House on Wednesday afternoon to press for a $110 billion national security supplemental spending package including additional support for Ukraine and Israel. Yet while both House and Senate leaders emerged from the meeting calling it "productive" or "very positive," it’s clear that differences over border reforms remain an obstacle to any deal. "I told the president what I have been saying for many months and that is that we must have change at the border, substantive policy change," House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters after the meeting. The Louisiana Republican also reiterated that he and his members still want answers about the strategy and endgame in Ukraine’s war to fend off Russian invasion — and accountability for the funding the United States provides. "We understand that all these things are important, but we must insist — we must insist — that the border be the top priority," Johnson said. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said that Biden was open to border changes and that the leaders had largely agreed that they must provide more aid for Ukraine and address the southern border. "There was a large amount of agreement around the table that we must do Ukraine, and we must do border. There was tremendous focus on Ukraine, and an understanding that if we don't come to Ukraine's aid, that the consequences for America around the globe would be nothing short of devastating," Schumer said. "There were a couple of people in the room that said let's do border first. We said we have to do both together." Schumer said he is more optimistic now that the Senate can reach a border deal unlocking support for more aid to Ukraine, Israel and allies in the Indo-Pacific region. "I am more optimistic than ever before that we come to an agreement. I put the chances a little bit greater than half. And that's the first time I can say that," he told reporters. The House isn’t likely to go along, though. Republicans had pushed for border security measures as a precursor to any additional Ukraine aid, but Johnson has insisted that the bipartisan border bill being negotiated in the Senate would fall short of House GOP demands and be dead on arrival in his chamber. "I don’t think now is the time for comprehensive immigration reform because we know how complicated that is," he said hours before the White House meeting. "You can’t do that quickly. I do think it’s past time to secure the border." Johnson reiterated that the border must be secured before more aid could go to Ukraine. "I’m going to tell the president what I’m telling all of you, what we’ve told the American people: border, border, border," he said. "We have to secure our own border before we talk about doing anything else." He also suggested that even a deal that met his criteria might still not be enough to win Republican support for Ukraine. Republican rifts remain: House and Senate Republican leaders are divided on the supplemental bill and aid to Ukraine. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has urged his members to take the deal being negotiated for Republicans by Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma. "I think it’s time to go ahead with the supplemental, and I’m anticipating that it’ll be before us next week," McConnell told reporters. McConnell and other senior Senate Republicans are urging their members to make the most of the leverage they have at this moment and not wait for the possibility of a Republican-controlled Congress and White House next year. "If we had a 100 percent Republican government — president, House, Senate — we probably would not be able to get a single Democratic vote to pass what Senator Lankford and the administration are trying to get together on," McConnell said. "So this is a unique opportunity to accomplish something in divided government that wouldn’t be there under unified government." Staving off a shutdown: The Senate on Tuesday night cleared one hurdle on the path to a stopgap spending bill needed to avoid a partial government shutdown Friday. Johnson on Wednesday again defended his agreement with Schumer for $1.66 trillion in discretionary spending for fiscal year 2024, which has come under fire from ultraconservatives in his conference. He also defended his acceptance of a short-term spending measure, known as a continuing resolution or CR, after having said he doesn’t want any more such bills. "I wanted no more CRs until we could move this process forward. We’ve achieved that," Johnson told reporters. "In spite of what people are saying on both sides, this is a better agreement than we had." Johnson noted that Republicans have the second-smallest House majority in U.S. history and so can’t expect to get everything they want. But, he argued, the current process will result in the Republican goal of passing individual spending bills rather than an omnibus and will allow how appropriators to fight for GOP policy changes in those spending bills. What’s next: History suggests that McConnell is right about the prospects of a border deal under a Trump administration and Republican-led Congress. But finalizing a deal won’t be easy. Senate negotiators reportedly still have to bridge some key differences, and Johnson still faces the fury of his right-wing members, who remain angry over his spending deal and would erupt over a border deal that failed to meet all of their demands. The bottom line: Republicans may want to ensure that the border stays a hot-button issue in an election year. Then again, decrying the border crisis but refusing to act on it might be a politically perilous stance. Chart of the Day: Child Poverty Rebounds The child poverty rate plunged to a record low of 5.2% during the pandemic, thanks in large part to a temporary boost to the child tax credit, which pumped money into millions of low-income households. But with the end of that program, the child poverty rate has rebounded sharply, as the chart below shows, spurring lawmakers to consider [another increase]( in the value of the tax credit, albeit at a more modest level. Bloomberg opinion columnist Karl W. Smith [writes]( Wednesday that the proposal unveiled by lawmakers this week to increase the size of the child tax credit for three years — combined with the renewal of some tax breaks for businesses, with the whole package paid for by ending a troubled pandemic era tax program — is a good one. Smith, an economist who previously worked at the right-leaning Tax Foundation, says the increase in the tax program would be worth doing, even if its costs were not offset and ended up costing as much as $100 billion. "That might sound strange given the dire fiscal straits the US is in, but not all deficit increases are created equal," Smith writes. "The cost of not lowering child poverty is extreme." Smith cites research showing that child poverty costs the U.S. as much as $1 trillion a year, which suggests that spending more now to reduce much bigger costs later makes fiscal sense. Number of the Day: $125,340 Households with work-based health insurance have lost out on $125,340 in wages on average over the last 30 years due to rising insurance premiums, according to a [new analysis]( published by JAMA Network. The study by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania, Tufts University and the University of Massachusetts found that the increase in the cost of health insurance premiums claimed nearly 5% of total income over a 32-year period between 1988 and 2019. The study also found that the loss was significantly higher for Black and Hispanic families than it was for White families. Overall, the researchers concluded that the increasing cost of health insurance is probably associated with decreased household earnings and higher income inequality. Highlighting the study Wednesday, Axios’s Caitlin Owens [wrote]( "While employers, rather than workers, typically bear the brunt of rising health insurance costs, the study is further evidence that rising premiums are costing workers through wages they would have otherwise received." --------------------------------------------------------------- Send your feedback to yrosenberg@thefiscaltimes.com. And please encourage your friends to [sign up here]( for their own copy of this newsletter. --------------------------------------------------------------- Fiscal News Roundup - [Johnson Digs In Against Border Deal to Unlock Ukraine Aid, Defying Biden]( – New York Times - [Johnson Maintains Hardline Border Position Following White House Meeting]( – Politico - [Johnson Gets Squeezed by Biden, Senate GOP on Ukraine, Border]( – The Hill - [Johnson: Now Is Not ‘the Time for Comprehensive Immigration Reform’]( – The Hill - [McConnell to Speaker Johnson: Prepare to Get a Border-Ukraine Deal From the Senate]( – Politico - [The Border Deal’s Forgotten Problem: Progressives]( – Politico - [House Approves Resolution Denouncing Biden’s ‘Open-Border Policies’]( – The Hill - [Senate Leaders Race to Pass Stopgap Spending Bill Before Potential Snowstorm]( – Politico - [Congress Moves Toward Preventing Government Shutdown This Weekend]( – Washington Post - [Government Shutdown Could Stall Boeing Max 9 Investigation]( – Washington Post - [Ukraine Needs Money From the US and Europe to Keep Its Economy Running. Will the Aid Come?]( – Associated Press - [Obamacare Enrollment Is Surging. Here’s Where]( – Politico Views and Analysis - [Do House Republicans Want a Border Deal or a Campaign Issue?]( – Ed Kilgore, New York - [Expanding the Child Tax Credit Makes Economic Sense]( – Karl W. Smith, Bloomberg - [What Congress Still Needs to Ink a Bipartisan Tax Deal]( – Theodoric Meyer and Leigh Ann Caldwell, Washington Post - [The Class War on Kids]( – Sarah Jones, New York - [Will the Supreme Court Finish Trump’s War Against Regulation?]( – Timothy Noah, New Republic - [Biden Can Banish Lead Pipes in America — but Only if He Gets Tougher]( – Robert Gebelhoff, Washington Post - [America’s Health System Isn’t Ready for the Surge of Seniors With Disabilities]( – Judith Graham, KFF Health News - [Manchin Staffers Cash In With Big Oil]( – Luke Goldstein, American Prospect Copyright © 2024 The Fiscal Times, All rights reserved. You are receiving this newsletter because you subscribed at our website or through Facebook. The Fiscal Times, 399 Park Avenue, 14th Floor, New York, NY 10022, United States Want to change how you receive these emails? [Update your preferences]( or [unsubscribe](