Ukraine aid could be saved by obscure congressional rules, Reagan-era politics, Boll Weevils and Gypsy Moths

An obscure congressional rule could force the House to vote on Ukraine aid without Speaker Johnson's blessing, but the last time it was used successfully was under Reagan

The U.S. Capitol (Bill Clark)

I know. This is going to require some explaining. Especially if you are not a creature of Capitol Hill — and even if you are a creature of Capitol Hill.

But why are we thinking about a "discharge petition" and "defeating the previous question?"

These are obscure, but critical parliamentary tools in the House of Representatives lawmakers might use to either fund the government or send money to Ukraine.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has been dubious about sending aid to Ukraine — even after the Senate adopted a bill with 70 members voting yes in February.

Both a "discharge petition" and "defeating the previous question" are methods for a majority of House members to bypass the House speaker and either put a bill on the floor against his or her wishes or seize control of the floor. 

Both gambits are rarely successful. The House has only successfully gone over the head of the speaker with a discharge petition twice in the past 23 years. For a defeat of "moving the previous question," one must reel back to the 1980s.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., told CBS there was "a 40-45% shot" to go around the leadership another way.  (Nathan Howard)

"Defeating the previous question is something like a nuclear device," said McHenry. "It is a vast act of war."

So what is "defeating the previous question?"

The House must often take an initial vote to compel a second vote on the issue at hand. Kind of voting to agree to take a vote. This often comes up when the House is considering a "rule" to manage floor debate. That primary vote is called "ordering the previous question," or a "PQ" in congressional shorthand. If the House adopts the PQ, it has "voted to have the next vote." That almost always happens.

But things get a little weird if the House defeats the previous question.

The minority — or whoever is trying to defeat the PQ — then marshals control of the House floor for an hour. They can bring up anything they want. In this potential case, a "rule" to set the parameters of debate on a bill to aid Ukraine.

In short, if the House approves the rule, then it’s on to debate on the Ukraine bill. And then a vote on the bill.

But "defeating the previous question" is rarely successful. The last successful defeat of a previous question came in 1988. Before that, 1981. But what happened in 1981 was of historical significance.

U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, center, walks through Statuary Hall during a vote at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., March 13, 2024.  (Al Drago)

Most of these boll weevils and gypsy moths eventually flitted back to their home parties later.

However, there is a reason why we write about the gypsy moths and boll weevils when it comes to aiding Ukraine. It’s possible lawmakers could turn to "defeating the previous question" as a mechanism to seize control of the floor and put a Ukraine aid package on the floor. 

But the chances of a defeated "PQ" as a viable parliamentary option for advocates of Ukraine to succeed are the highest they’ve been since the Reagan tax cut vote in 1981. In this case, most Democrats support the Ukraine aid bill — blended with an odd mixture of some Republicans. But, unlike 1981, it’s not the Democrats who might betray leadership. This would be Republicans. And while it’s not the same coalition of Gypsy Moths who sometimes defected from the GOP brass in the 1980s, those Republicans who would help Ukraine are mostly from the north and Midwest.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

How or if Ukraine ever gets aid is unclear. And one can debate if a "discharge petition" or a "defeating the previous question" is on the "in" or "out" list.

But the real question for lawmakers is whether aiding Ukraine is on the "in" or "out" list for members of Congress.

Chad Pergram currently serves as a senior congressional correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC). He joined the network in September 2007 and is based out of Washington, D.C.

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more Fox News politics content.

Subscribed

You've successfully subscribed to this newsletter!

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ukraine-aid-could-be-saved-by-obscure-congressional-rules-reagan-era-politics-boll-weevils-and-gypsy-moths