Spending bill fails, Oklahoma delegates divided on next steps

Last Updated on September 19, 2024, 9:13 PM | Published: September 19, 2024

WASHINGTON – Representatives of Oklahoma’s five-member delegation are split over how a new spending bill should be shaped following the defeat of the plan pushed by House Speaker Mike Johnson.

As the budget deadline looms, the need for a spending bill to extend government funding increases. A spending bill would keep the government open. If a spending bill does not pass by September 30, the government will shut down until one is passed. 

Earlier this week, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) told reporters it would be politically beyond stupid to shut down the government before an election, saying Republicans would get the blame.

Johnson’s spending bill failed with three Democrats voting for the continuing resolution and opposition from some Republicans, with 14 voting against the bill and two voting present. 

All five members of the Oklahoma House delegation voted in favor of the bill. House Appropriations Committee Chairman Rep. Tom Cole spoke on the floor in support of the bill before the roll call vote.

“It’s clear we are unable to complete the full appropriations process by September 30,” Cole said. “That means that a continuing resolution is needed. The bill before us (H.R. 9494) extends government funding through March 28, 2025, ensuring that the government remains open and providing critical services for our constituents.”

With the six-month spending bill failing on Wednesday, it is unclear how Johnson will shape the next iteration of the bill. 

On Wednesday night, Cole told reporters Johnson had not shared his plan to reshape the spending bill with him. Cole (R, Moore) reiterated that Johnson had hoped his continuing resolution proposal (H.R. 9494) would pass. 

But Rep. Josh Brecheen supports the position of the House Freedom Caucus, of which he is a member. In August, the House Freedom Caucus released a statement urging House Republican leadership to pass a six-month spending bill that includes the SAVE Act, a proposal that mirrors other laws but gives Republicans a campaign talking point. 

The spending bill that failed Wednesday reflects the House Freedom Caucuses’ wishes. 

Rep. Frank Lucas (R-Cheyenne) said he needs to see what the spending bill looks like after the weekend before settling on a position. 

“You have to fund the troops, you have to fund security, you have to fund all the things at USDA,” Lucas said. “I would have preferred to have passed the package this week and had leverage to get a better deal.” 

“But my friends decided not to do that, so let’s see what they offer us.”

Johnson’s spending bill ultimately failed due to controversy about the length of the funding and the addition of the SAVE Act.

Representatives on both sides of the aisle have called for a three-month spending bill. The House is expected to propose a bipartisan spending bill early next week, Roll Call reported. 

Cole has helped lead the effort to reduce the length of the continuing resolution to three months. On September 10, Cole told reporters he believes lawmakers need to focus on finishing their funding work and getting it done quickly so the new Congress and President can begin with a clean slate. 

“I personally think it’s not a good thing to give a new president—and we’re going to have a new president—an immediate fiscal crisis,” Cole said. 

The top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, Rep. Rose DeLauro (D-Connecticut.), voiced her opposition to a six-month spending bill and said it is time for both parties to work together to get a spending bill passed and finish their work on a full-year spending bill before the end of the 118th Congress on January 3, 2025.

House Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York) called the addition of the SAVE Act a “nonstarter” for Democrats and said that the party would oppose any funding bill that includes policy riders pushed by Trump.

The SAVE Act, or Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, requires individuals to provide proof of US citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections. The bill also requires states to remove noncitizens from voting rolls. 

It is already illegal under federal law for noncitizens to vote in elections. 

Additionally, the act would enable individuals to sue state election officials if they register someone to vote without proper presentation of U.S. citizenship. It would also establish criminal penalties for the same offense.

On August 18, in a post on Truth Social, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said Republicans should not accept a spending bill without the SAVE Act attached, indicating he would rather the government shutdown. 

“If Republicans don’t get the SAVE Act and every ounce of it, they should not agree to a Continuing Resolution in any way, shape, or form. Democrats are registering illegal voters by the TENS OF THOUSANDS, as we speak—they will be voting in the 2024 President Election, and they shouldn’t be allowed to,” Trump wrote. 

There is no evidence backing Trump’s claims on Truth Social. Studies have shown that noncitizen voting in federal and state elections is rare. In fact, in May, Johnson said he knows “intuitively” that it is happening without being able to provide evidence.

Republished in collaboration with Gaylord News, a reporting project of the University of Oklahoma Gaylord College of Journalism and Mass Communication. For more stories by Gaylord News go to GaylordNews.net.

Kevin Eagleson is reporting from Gaylord News’ Washington bureau fall of 2024 as part of an OU Daily scholarship.