On Tuesday, the White House released a statement noting that President Joe Biden would veto the Israel Security Assistance Support Act. Last week, reports came in that the Biden administration was withholding ammunition to Israel and the president himself shared with CNN's Erin Burnett that he would halt such aid if Israel went forward with its operation in Rafah. The statement comes after White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre spoke out against the bill during Monday's briefing.
As Axios put it in highlighting Democratic infighting, the bill "would have a real impact: Forcing the administration to stop withholding weapons shipments and choking off funding for the Pentagon and State Department if they refuse to comply."
Before indicating the president would veto the bill, the statement read (emphasis added):
The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 8369, the Israel Security Assistance Support Act, which seeks to limit the President’s discretion to ensure that the delivery of certain defense articles and services aligns with U.S. foreign policy objectives. The bill would undermine the President’s ability to execute an effective foreign policy. This bill could raise serious concerns about infringement on the President’s authorities under Article II of the Constitution, including his duties as Commander-in-Chief and Chief Executive and his power to conduct foreign relations. We strongly oppose attempts to constrain the President’s ability to deploy U.S. security assistance consistent with U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives.
The bill is a misguided reaction to a deliberate distortion of the Administration’s approach to Israel. The President has been clear: we will always ensure Israel has what it needs to defend itself. Our commitment to Israel is ironclad. The Administration will continue to use all funds appropriated for Israel consistent with legal requirements, including in the recent supplemental, rendering this bill unnecessary and unwise. Furthermore, this bill, if enacted, could lead to spiraling unintended consequences, prohibiting the United States from adjusting our security assistance posture with respect to Israel in any way, including to address unanticipated emergent needs, even if Israel and the United States agree that military needs have changed and supplies should change accordingly.
The statement not only repeats the hollow claim that Biden has supposedly "been clear" that the administration's "commitment to Israel is ironclad." To add insult to injury, the statement also claims that the bill's "a misguided reaction to a deliberate distortion of the Administration’s approach to Israel."
News of the threatened veto came as the House Rules Committee met to discuss the bill with House Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul (R-TX) and Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY) appearing to speak about the bill.
Rep. Joe Neguse (D-CO) brought up that veto threat during the meeting, also pointing out that "it's of course not going to be considered in the Senate." In response, McCaul acknowledged that the bill is looking to "put pressure" on Biden.
There were some common themes to McCaul's and Meeks' remarks. McCaul reiterated throughout this part of the meeting on this specific bill that there has been no transparency from the Biden administration. What is known about halting aid is from news reports and Biden's remarks to CNN.
"I have to take the president at his own word," the chairman said. He emphasized throughout, including when questioned by Neguse, that he had not had briefings from the Biden administration on this specific concern. "All I have is the press, and the president's words on CNN; that's the best I got." He also later emphasized there's been "complete silence." McCaul did share he has a meeting scheduled with Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Friday.
Neguse and McCaul went back and forth about how the matter has been complicated with regards to following regular order with the bill, with the chairman reminding how Israel is at war and this is an administration. "I don't see how you can follow regular order with an administration that won't talk to you," McCaul offered.
It's not just a lack of transparency, though. What McCaul spoke to as "the partisan nature" on the Biden administration, is how Meeks said Democrats have had access to the president. Meeks did later agree and emphasize throughout that he wants members of the administration to come speak to the issue, touting how bipartisan the House Committee on Foreign Affairs is.
As he also spoke at length about the kind of message that this halting of aid sends to enemies of the United States as well as our allies who cannot trust us, McCaul also pushed for private diplomacy in dealing with threats to halt aid. Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA) wondered the same thing, as he expressed concerns overall for how foreign powers regard and no longer trust the United States.
McCaul revealed to Rep. Guy Reschenthaler (R-PA) he has indeed asked for briefings and calls on the matter. When discussing that, he noted how Israel has been asking about and is upset about aid being halted. McCaul pointed out this "does great damage to the relationship" with Israel, and again pointed out that such concerns about Rafah should have been conducted as a matter of private diplomacy. "What that means is Israel cannot complete its mission," which means Hamas is still in power "and we're never going to get where we want to be" on foreign policy with Israel being recognized by other nations.
Reschenthaler and McCaul also discussed at length Biden's catastrophic foreign policy. The former pointed to how we didn't have all these issues during the Trump administration, with McCaul suggesting that's because there was "a fear factor" in place. McCaul was also candid that "every day I worry about World War III."
Later, McCaul similarly reminded Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) that "there's been no wars" and "we had deterrence" during Trump's presidency. As Roy pointed out, Russian President Vladimir Putin didn't invade Ukraine and Hamas didn't attack Israel on October 7 until Biden was president. "It's not by coincidence, it's by design, because when our adversaries see weakness, you invite aggression, and that serves what we have right now," McCaul reminded.
Roy and McCaul also discussed the horrific atrocities that Hamas committed on October 7, to remind how we got here. "Israel does not target innocent civilians, Hamas does! Israel did not start this, Hamas did, and they have a right to finish it," McCaul passionately reminded, also calling out the Biden administration for "not allowing [Israel] to finish the job!"
"The optics are looking that way," McCaul warned, when talking about how it appears the Biden administration is siding with Hamas over Israel, which sends "a really dangerous message to our adversaries."
For all of the concerns expressed by Democratic members defending the Biden administration about Israel not doing enough for civilians, McCaul pointed out that Israel is "exercising great caution to protect innocent lives," with Roy and McCaul both mentioning how there are leaflets being dropped calling on civilians to evacuate, something Hamas certainly did not do on October 7. "No other nation on earth has ever gone to this extent to protect innocent civilians," McCaul made clear.
Another important point that Roy brought up, something Democrats often conveniently neglect, is that a poll has shown an overwhelming majority of Gazans support Hamas and don't believe they committed war crimes.
While Roy reminded that he "opposed the foreign aid package [from last month] for a variety of reasons," he also expressed concerns about the Israel bill in that foreign aid package based on the $9 million that goes to Gaza.
"It was Hamas, not Israel," Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY) then similarly reminded about who is responsible for this conflict, as he then blasted pro-Hamas narratives of calling for a ceasefire and Democrats would try to equivocate Hamas' actions on October 7 and Israel's move to destroy Hamas. It took this long in the hearing--several hours at this point, thanks to Langworthy bringing them up--for mention of the hostages to come up, as Scott went on to mention.
Speaking further about private diplomacy versus public conversations for threatening to halt aid, Scott expressed belief that Biden is looking to appease his far-left base, in Michigan especially, where over 101,000 people voted "uncommitted" rather than vote for Biden in the state's Democratic primary in late February. Trump is narrowly leading in Michigan by +0.8 against Biden.
Beyond concerns of transparency and concerns, McCaul also reminded that Congress specifically appropriated funds, and has the Article I powers to do so.
Meeks, as did Democratic members on the Rules Committee, also went for a narrative of seeking to downplay the halting of aid, in that it's one particular shipment of weapons. As his colleagues from across the aisle made such points, McCaul pointed out that he hasn't been debriefed, and so wouldn't know exactly.
The chairman also previewed how committees will mark-up a bill asking for advanced notice, which will be done through regular order.