Hakeem Jeffries rejects GOP spending bill as “unserious and unacceptable”

WASHINGTON — Calling it “unserious and unacceptable,” House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries rejected on Monday a proposal from Speaker Mike Johnson that links continued government funding for six months with a measure to require proof of citizenship when registering to vote.

The response frames the spending battle to come over the next weeks as lawmakers work to reach consensus on a short-term spending bill that would prevent a partial government shutdown when the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1. Lawmakers hope to avoid a shutdown just weeks before voters go to the polls.

Johnson is punting the final decisions on full-year spending into next year when a new president and Congress take over. He’s doing so at the urging of members within his conference who believe that Republicans will be in a better position next year to secure the funding and policy priorities they want.

But Democrats said the appropriations process should be wrapped up by this Congress, and the short-term measure should reflect that. It also needs to be free of “partisan policy changes,” Jeffries said.

“There is no other viable path forward that protects the health, safety and economic well-being of hardworking American taxpayers,” Jeffries wrote in a letter to House Democrats released Monday.

Lawmakers are returning to Washington this week following a traditional August recess spent mostly working in their home states and districts. They are not close to completing work on the dozen annual appropriations bills that will fund the agencies during the next fiscal year, so they’ll need to approve a stopgap measure.

Johnson’s proposal is not only running into resistance from Democrats, but it was clear Monday night that there are also some in the GOP conference who won’t vote for any stopgap bill, let alone one they say spends too much. Johnson can afford to lose only four dissenters from within his conference if Democrats are united in opposition.

“We need to stop spending at a level that is untenable for the American people,” said Rep. Cory Mills, R-Fla., who also predicted the bill would not have the votes to pass.

The House bill including the proof of citizenship mandate for voter registration complicates the effort. The voter registration measure is popular with House Republicans and has already passed once before in that chamber. The House Freedom Caucus, which generally includes the chamber’s most conservative members, called for it to be attached to the spending bill. But Democrats are overwhelmingly opposed.

Republicans say that requiring proof of citizenship would ensure that U.S. elections are only for American citizens, improving confidence in the nation’s federal election system, something that former President Donald Trump has sought to undermine over the years.

Opponents say it is already against the law for noncitizens to vote in federal elections and that the document requirements would disenfranchise millions of Americans who do not have the necessary documents readily available when they get a chance to register.

Trump and other Republicans have revved up their complaints about the issue of noncitizens voting with the influx of migrants across the U.S.-Mexico border under President Joe Biden’s administration. They are contending Democrats let them in to add them to the voter rolls. But the available evidence shows that noncitizen voting in federal elections is incredibly rare.

Johnson called the proof of citizenship mandate a “righteous fight” as he entered the Capitol Monday afternoon. He said that even if a small percentage of people who have entered the U.S. illegally end up registering to vote, “they can throw the election. This is serious business.”

Senate Democrats have also come out against Johnson’s proposal. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer called the bill “pure partisan posturing.”

“Speaker Johnson knows deep down that he needs to work with Democrats to get anything done,” Schumer said.

The White House said that if the bill reached Biden’s desk he will veto it. The veto threat said states already have effective safeguards in place to verify voters’ eligibility and maintain accurate voter rolls.