Far-Right Rebels Against Mike Johnson’s Government Funding Bill

WASHINGTON — Several far-right Republicans have come out against a plan by House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to pair must-pass government funding with a bill targeting the supposed threat of widespread noncitizen voting.

At least six Republicans have said they would vote against the bill, which is likely more than Johnson can lose without having to rely on Democratic votes to push legislation through the House.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) said he’ll vote against the bill because it doesn’t have enough spending cuts or reforms to government programs.

“You’re forcing me as a conservative to vote for terrible spending packages, all this woke stuff, possibly money for abortions, for transgender surgeries, all these things,” Burchett told HuffPost on Tuesday after a Republican meeting in the Capitol basement.

Burchett noted that the House already passed election integrity provisions, in the bill known as the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or SAVE Act, and the Democratic-controlled Senate simply ignored it.

“And they haven’t caught any heat over it,” Burchett said.

Now, Johnson wants to pair that with the funding bill. Five other House Republicans said Monday they wouldn’t support the bills paired together, according to Politico. If all members are present for a roll call, Republicans can lose only four votes without needing Democratic support. Five Democrats supported a stand-alone version of the SAVE Act earlier this year but would not necessarily do so again.

“Stand-alone pieces of legislation are different than poison pill bills put into government funding spending,” Rep. Pete Aguilar (Calif.), a member of the House Democratic leadership team, said Tuesday. “A lot of the attack ads have already been written.”

If Republicans can’t pass their bill at the planned vote on Wednesday, then Johnson likely would bring a clean government-funding bill to the floor before the end of the month and it would probably pass with overwhelming bipartisan support, avoiding an Oct. 1 shutdown. Johnson refused to disavow such an outcome in response to a reporter’s question on Tuesday.

The SAVE Act is designed less to become law than to amplify former President Donald Trump’s false claims that Democrats are trying to steal the 2024 election with illegal votes from undocumented immigrants.

Federal law already prohibits noncitizens from voting, and the available evidence suggests noncitizens don’t cast illegal ballots often enough to sway an election. The SAVE Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote; current law requires people to attest to their citizenship under penalty of perjury.

At a news conference on Tuesday, Johnson said stricter voting procedures are necessary because the American people are concerned about voter fraud. (Of course, Johnson himself has been telling people to be concerned.) And, Johnson said, requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration is just common sense.

“It is against federal law, but so is minors buying alcohol,” Johnson said Tuesday. “You still require identification to do it. Why? Because just because something’s on the books, doesn’t mean people are going to comply.”

A possible flaw in the analogy is that people have a constitutional right to vote, not to buy alcohol, and asking them to dig up paperwork such as a birth certificate or passport might overly burden that right.

Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.), chair of the far-right House Freedom Caucus, said he supports the government funding bill with the SAVE Act attached, but suggested it might be too late for the legislation to make a major difference in the November election.

“Admittedly, you’re 56 days from the election, so there’s not going to be perfect implementation and enforcement if the SAVE Act would have passed today,” Good told HuffPost. “However, requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote ― we have some states that do same-day registration ― between now and the election would be helpful.”