Aid bill passage reveals deep rifts among SWFL reps over US role in world

The US Capitol. (Photo: Architect of the Capitol)

April 20, 2024 by David Silverberg

Passage yesterday of a $95 billion aid package to Israel, Ukraine, Taiwan and the Indo-Pacific in the US House of Representatives revealed fundamental differences among Southwest Florida’s representatives regarding America’s role in the world.

Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-26-Fla.), chair of the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, had a key role in drafting the legislation and voted for it. He supports active American involvement in world affairs and events.

Reps. Byron Donalds (R-19-Fla.) and Greg Steube (R-17-Fla.) voted against it, advocating an insular, isolationist approach that would favor Russia’s conquest of Ukraine.

The bill passed in an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 316 to 94.

One hundred and sixty five Democrats and 151 Republicans voted to approve the measure, while 55 Republicans and 39 Democrats voted against it. Twenty-one members did not vote.

The package consisted of four bills: the Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act (House Resolution (HR) 8034; the Ukraine Security Supplemental Appropriations Act (HR 8035); the Indo-Pacific Security Supplemental Act (HR 8036); and the 21st Century Peace through Strength Act (HR 8038). The last was a miscellany of measures including sanctions against Russia and Iran, international crime prevention measures and anti-fentanyl and Tik-Tok prohibitions.

These bills will now be merged with a bill already passed in the Senate, and a vote on the whole is expected today, Saturday, April 20.

Diaz-Balart strongly promoted the legislation prior to the vote.

“As Chairman of the subcommittee that provides funds for national security and foreign assistance priorities, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of these important pieces of legislation,” he stated in a press release on April 17. “The strategic alliance between our most dangerous adversaries, such as communist China, Russia, and the terrorist State of Iran, poses a direct threat to our national security. This bill fully funds our security commitments to support Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan, which are confronting existential challenges as they face threats from dangerous, anti-American regimes. Passage of this critical national security legislation will support US interests in the Middle East, Europe, and the Indo-Pacific, and make us safer here at home by supporting our military.”

He continued: “There is nothing our adversaries would love more than for the United States to fail to stand with our friends in their time of greatest need. We have no time to spare. Passage of this aid package is critical.”

In contrast, immediately after voting against the bill, Donalds posted on X: “Government must put the AMERICAN PEOPLE FIRST.”

Steube opposed the bill on both partisan and substantive grounds.

“Tells you a lot about our current Republican ‘leadership’ when there are more Democrats than Republicans voting for a so-called ‘Republican’ rule…” he posted on X when the House debated the rules for considering the measure.

Steube made his objections to security assistance in general known in March during earlier consideration of Ukraine and Israel aid. On March 22 he posted on X: “101 Republicans just voted for an out-of-control spending bill that includes more money for Ukraine and $500 million for Jordan’s border security…Meanwhile, as we sit here in Washington DC, our country is being invaded. What about America’s border security? This bill is AMERICA LAST.”

Donalds’ and Steube’s opposition is in keeping with that of the extreme conservative wing of the Republican Party, which is now considering attempting the ouster of House Speaker Rep. Mike Johnson (R-4-La.) for working with Democrats to pass the package.

Liberty lives in light

© 2024 by David Silverberg

ALERT! Collier election resolution to be introduced Tuesday was drafted by national election denial group

Review: The movie ‘Civil War’—incitement or deterrent?