Byron York’s Daily Memo: Turning Ukraine aid into partisan trap
Is that what really happened? Are Republicans really against aid for Ukraine, even as they slam Biden for not giving enough aid to Ukraine? How could that be? Anyone who wants to know what actually happened needs to look a little closer. This is the real story:
When Democrats and their media allies say Republicans voted “against $13.6 billion for Ukraine,” they are referring to a giant, $1.5 trillion omnibus government funding bill passed on March 10. It was must-pass legislation, needed to keep the government operating and avoid the kind of partial shutdowns that have been seen in the past. But this one was not only huge it was different from recent spending measures. The difference was that it revived earmarks, which are spending provisions put in at the behest of individual lawmakers. In the past, earmarks created a culture of runaway pork spending, which led Republicans to push for a ban successfully in 2011.
Now, they are back. The spending bill was enormous 2,741 pages. It spent $730 billion on domestic programs, which Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy characterized as investing “in future prosperity, in our health, and reduc[ing] everyday costs for millions of Americans, such as child care, a college education, and heating and cooling costs.” It also spent $782 billion on defense.
And then there were more than 4,000 earmarks, mostly but not exclusively from Democrats. Among the spending in the bill was $1.6 million for the “development of equitable growth of shellfish aquaculture in Rhode Island.” There was $3 million for a Gandhi museum in Houston and $3 million for the Palo Alto History Museum, in one of the richest communities in America. There was $800,000 for “artist lofts” in Pomona, California. And much, much more. Republican Sen. Mike Braun kept a list of the earmarks, which you can read here.
It was a 2,741-page riot of spending. And amid all that, deep inside the bill was a provision for $13.6 billion in aid for Ukraine about $6.5 billion for military assistance and the rest for aid to displaced refugees. In all, the $13.6 billion represented less than 1% of the $1.5 trillion of spending in the omnibus bill.
Some Republicans were outraged. Why put the Ukraine aid in a huge bill that includes so much useless spending that so many senators oppose? But that was the point. The Senate leadership put the Ukraine measure in the big bill so that senators who opposed the pork would have to think twice about voting against it since it would mean they would also be voting against aid to Ukraine. In effect, the leadership held Ukraine aid hostage until senators also voted for funding equitable shellfish aquaculture in Rhode Island.
Republicans tried to get around it. Scott, for one, pushed for a separate vote for Ukraine aid. Here is how the New York Times reported it: “To push the package through the Senate, lawmakers had to navigate a series of objections from conservative Republi