Special Poll
On Wednesday, tensions flared among some Republican lawmakers after President Trump unexpectedly derailed a deal orchestrated by House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana, which had been crafted in collaboration with Democrats to ensure government funding until March. This move left several members of Congress visibly frustrated as they had viewed the agreement as a crucial chance to advance significant legislative goals.
One House Republican lamented the situation, noting that the abrupt cancellation of the deal was going to leave many disillusioned, especially those who were hopeful about concluding key actions before the session ended. Trump’s intervention came via a joint statement with Vice President-elect JD Vance, declaring that the funding package should incorporate a debt ceiling increase.
In the wake of this decision, another Republican lawmaker, who chose to remain anonymous to speak candidly about the president-elect, critiqued Trump for effectively sabotaging the bill, pointing out the broader impact, including on the agricultural sector which stood to benefit from $10 billion in farm aid and an extension of the farm bill included in the package.
Representative Robert Aderholt of Alabama expressed a general desire among lawmakers to finalize the bill promptly, particularly with the upcoming holiday recess in mind, indicating a widespread eagerness to resolve the matter swiftly.
However, not all Republicans were opposed to Trump’s decision. Representative Andy Barr of Kentucky, who had successfully included measures restricting investments to China in the bill, recognized that although his provisions were at risk, many constituents supported Trump’s stance. He noted his office had been inundated with calls from voters opposing the bill.
Adding to the complexities, Aderholt adopted a cautious tone, suggesting that if there were significant concerns hidden within the bill’s details, it would be preferable to unearth them before proceeding to a vote.
An initial GOP source further revealed to Axios a sentiment of betrayal, suggesting that Trump had initially given Johnson the leeway to negotiate only to later undermine him following opposition from influential figures like Elon Musk. This pattern, the lawmaker feared, might become a recurring challenge in 2025, describing it as a predictable element of Trump’s approach to governance.