No. of Recommendations: 3
And that is what really bugs me, there was no discussion, no debate on the merits and effects of the various components, it was like we tried once so now on to Ukraine which is what we really wanted in the first place.
I think that misreads the situation. The reason there was no discussion, no debate, is because both Trump and Johnson signaled very clearly that no possible Senate bill would be acceptable to them. So why would any Republicans continue to work on it? Lankford had his head taken off (metaphorically) for negotiating the most stringent potential passing bill we've seen in two generations. Johnson's "the bill is DOA," before the text came out rather than, "we will fight to improve the problems with the bill," is a clear statement that no movement off the HR 2 messaging provisions would move forward. Which is why McConnell and Lankford gave up.
My suggestion to the house when the senate clean bill comes over is to staple HR2 to it and send it back to the senate as an amendment. And that doesn't mean take it or leave it but at least debate it, amend it, reach some sort of compromise, just don't ignore it like you did last time.
They don't have the votes to do that. Every Democrat would vote against it, and there are going to be at least a few Republicans who want to vote against Ukraine aid regardless of whether HR 2 is attached to it or not. Plus, it's unlikely that the Freedom Caucus hardliners want this to end up in conference committee, where a deal might get struck, rather than killed outright.
