US : A $60 billion aid package for Ukraine that provides about $300 million to bolster the country’s border struck a nerve with several lawmakers increasingly frustrated with the administration’s handling of the crisis at the U.S. southern border.
On Saturday, the House of Representatives approved spending $60 billion to help Ukraine build up its defense against Russia’s invasion, with a 311-112 vote. Republicans were not unanimous in their approval of the measure, with 101 voting in favor of the aid package and 112 voting against it.
The U.S. national debt is at more than $34 trillion.
Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., unveiled the foreign aid plan earlier in the week, and a lack of any border security measures prompted allies to be wary of letting the bills move forward.
A meeting to advance the package ended Wednesday night without a vote because it provided funding for Ukraine and not U.S. border security.
One of those Republican foreign aid hawks on the House Rules Committee was Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas. The House Rules Committee is the final barrier before a piece of legislation moves to the House floor for a vote.
After the vote, Roy and others turned to the social media platform X to express their discontent with the foreign aid package.
“Today, I voted no… These bills were brought forward under a contrived process to achieve a pre-determined outcome — a $100 billion, unpaid-for foreign aid package while failing to secure the border,” Roy wrote.
“For months, House Republicans — specifically, Speaker Mike Johnson — have been unequivocal that we would not send billions in additional aid to Ukraine without securing our own border first.
This package represents a complete reversal of a position that previously unified the Republican conference, despite the clear & present danger the southern border represents to U.S. national security.”
Roy said he supported Ukraine’s effort to defeat Russia but added he cannot support sending $60 billion in additional funding without the U.S. having a “clear mission” and “policy changes necessary” to secure its own border.
Like Roy, Rep. Ben Cline, R-Va., voted against the package, citing “urgent problems” in the U.S.
“States and cities across our nation are grappling with the consequences of Biden’s border crisis, inflation continues to squeeze the budgets of every American household and our country is over $34 trillion in debt,” Cline said. “As I continue fighting for the people of Virginia’s Sixth District, I urge my colleagues in Congress and the Biden Administration to listen to the American people and put their concerns first.”
House Freedom Caucus member Eric Burlison also weighed in.
“Republicans have control of the House, and we should be leveraging it to secure our border, unfortunately the Uniparty is working to secure the borders of Ukraine instead of our own border,” he said. “
According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection sources, there were over 7,000 encounters at the southern border Friday after two days in a row of about 6,500. During prior weeks, the number of encounters had exceeded 4,000.
“We are beyond disappointed that the House would give aid to secure the borders of foreign countries but gave nothing to allow the Border Patrol to secure the safety of the United States,” Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council, told Fox News. “There’s nothing more backwards. I wouldn’t have even expected taxpayers’ dollars. They could have given us policy, and that would have been enough.”
By Greg Wehner
Join: 👉 https://t.me/acnewspatriots
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of AC.NEWS
Disclaimer: This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). AC.News will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article www.ac.news websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner. Reprinting this article: Non-commercial use OK. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Discussion about this post