House leaves voter integrity out of new spending deal

Republican leadership in the House of Representatives unveiled a short-term spending bill on Sunday that, if passed, would extend the government’s current funding levels through December 20, 2024. The new package is the most recent attempt by U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La, to avoid a partial government shutdown that could kick in when the fiscal year ends Sept. 30.

How did we get here? The new bill comes on the heels of a failed vote this past Wednesday over a similar package. The previous bill package included greater voter registration integrity measures and would have extended government funding for longer, stretching into March of 2025. 

Fourteen Republicans joined with Democrats to defeat that earlier bill in a 202-220 vote. Three Democrats voted for the package. Two Republicans voted present.

 Republicans who crossed party lines to oppose the bill shared frustrations that the package would do nothing to curb bloated federal spending—a refrain of similar concerns of past spending bills. Democrats, on the other hand, objected to the voting integrity measures, which they considered a poison pill addition having little to do with spending. The addition would have required states to verify proof of citizenship before registering voters to participate in federal elections.

 Without the voter-integrity measures included, House Minority leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., signaled that Democrats would support the new stopgap bill.

 “It is devoid of any partisan, right-wing policy changes that House Republicans inappropriately attempted to jam into the appropriations legislation,” Jeffries said in a statement. 

What does this mean for the overall spending picture? Republican lawmakers had mixed feelings not only about the previous bill’s spending provisions—but also the timeline it laid out. 

Legislators like Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, believed punting the spending question into next year would burden the incoming 119th Congress with the problems of the 118th. Cole wanted the current slate of legislators who worked on the bills and were familiar with them to resolve the spending problem—or at least try to—before the start of the new session on January 3, 2025. He opposed the six-month window of the previous package.

 Other lawmakers believe the new bill’s shorter framework will only exacerbate current gridlock. If passed, the bill would extend government spending just days before Christmas, setting up  Congress to reconsider funding in a lame-duck season after the November elections.

 Dig Deeper: Read my report on what Republican legislators say about a plan for Congress to decide its spending every two years.