Five things to know about Speaker Johnson's spending deal with Democrats

Speaker Mike Johnson (R La.) is facing heat from the party’s right flank after striking a deal with Democrats on government funding that conservative hardliners are already dismissing as a “total failure.” Lawmakers say the bipartisan deal breaks through a heated stalemate on how much to spend to keep the government running through September by providing a framework for negotiators to work from as they craft the dozen annual funding bills.

But with less than two weeks out from a key shutdown deadline key questions remain. Here’s what you need to know about the spending agreement. Speaker Mike Johnson (R La.) said both sides had agreed to a spending limit of $1.59 trillion for fiscal year 2024, including $886 billion for defense and $704 billion for nondefense discretionary funds.

That’s largely in line with the budget caps included in a bipartisan deal that President Biden and former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R Calif.) struck to raise the debt ceiling last year. However, the number on the nondefense side is a notable contrast from what Democrats have been touting of the recent compromise, which they said would allow for additional funding for nondefense programs north of $60 billion.

Both sides had been pushing for leadership to set a topline spending level as Congress continues to fall behind in its annual appropriations process. So far, Congress has sent zero of the 12 annual spending bills to Biden’s desk for signature, months after the initial deadline to hash out fiscal 2024 funding.

Some negotiators have also signaled another stopgap measure, known as a continuing resolution (CR), might be necessary to prevent a funding lapse later this month as work lags. Questions have been swirling around where a previous handshake agreement made between the White House and House GOP leadership as part of the larger debt limit deal stood in recent months amid opposition from hardline conservatives.

Democrats say that side agreement was key to ensuring what experts say would effectively amount to a freeze for nondefense funding, when compared to the previous year’s levels, despite the budget caps written into law. As part of the handshake deal, both sides agreed to a series of budget changes, including rescinding funding for IRS and pandemic efforts, to offset further funding to the nondefense side.

However, Johnson faced pressure from his right flank to abandon the agreement, struck under McCarthy, as conservatives have pursued steeper spending cuts beyond the debt limit deal. Democrats said on Sunday that they secured $772.7 billion for non defense discretionary funding as part of the new deal, while also protecting “key domestic priorities like veterans’ benefits, health care and nutrition assistance from the draconian cuts sought by right wing extremists.” House GOP leadership, meanwhile, touted “hard fought concessions” from Democrats made as part of the agreement, including accelerated rescissions of IRS funding that Congress already agreed to, as well as the claw back of about $6 billion in COVID funding.

“Overall, this agreement represents an actual year over year cut in non VA, nondefense spending,” Johnson said in a letter on Sunday. But Democrats are singing another tune. “Not a nickel was cut. Again, our goal was [$772 billion] and that’s precisely the number we reached in this bipartisan agreement,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D N.Y.) said on Monday.

The newly announced compromise has been met with growing criticism from hardline conservatives who panned the additional funding for nondefense as “reckless.” “Don’t be fooled. The DC Uniparty’s spending ‘deal’ is a total sham. The REAL topline spending level is $1.658 trillion—not $1.59 trillion.

Our nation simply cannot afford the Swamp’s reckless spending habits,” Rep. Andrew Clyde (R Ga.), who serves on the House Appropriations Committee and is a member of the Freedom Caucus, on Monday. The pushback comes as the group has been pressing the conference to step up efforts to bring down spending, often citing the climbing national debt, which currently stands at roughly $34 trillion.

However, not all Republicans have panned the plan. “While I continue to believe that additional defense funding is necessary, I hope this agreement will help us avoid a year long Continuing Resolution, implementation of the FRA’S CR penalty, or a government shutdown, which would be disastrous for our national defense, homeland security, biomedical research, and many other programs,” Sen.

Susan Collins (Maine), top Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said in a statement. There are also questions about where so called poison pill policy riders will fit in spending talks. While Johnson acknowledged on Sunday that the agreed to spending limits “will not satisfy everyone,” he argued the deal provides lawmakers a path to move the appropriations process forward and “fight for the important policy riders included” in the party’s funding bills.

Those riders have included policies regarding abortion and diversity efforts. And some in his party are already keeping tabs on the issue. “A $1659 topline in spending is terrible & gives away the leverage accomplished in the (already not great) caps deal. We’ll wait to see if we get meaningful policy riders… but 1) the NDAA was not a good preview, & 2) as usual, we keep spending more money we don’t have,” Rep.

Chip Roy (R Texas), a member of the House Freedom Caucus, wrote on X on Sunday. But those policy riders are nonstarters for Democrats, who reiterated their opposition this week. Schumer and House Minority Leader (D N.Y.) said Sunday that they have “made clear to Speaker Mike Johnson that Democrats will not support including poison pill policy changes in any of the twelve appropriations bills put before the Congress.” There are less than two weeks before the first shutdown deadline of Jan.

19, when funding is set to lapse for agencies like the departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Energy and Agriculture. The deadline for the remaining government agencies is Feb. 2. And even with the topline figures set, plenty of work remains. Lawmakers need to determine the process for passing 12 spending bills, write those bills and get them through an often intransigent Congress.

While some appropriators said ahead of the Christmas break that they had begun informal bicameral spending talks, they also acknowledged limitations they faced in conferencing their bills without knowing their subcommittee’s respective allocations. There has also been concern around the length of a potential stopgap measure if another is needed next week to keep certain agencies open, particularly as some Republicans have floated a yearlong CR – which experts warn could mean further spending cuts for nondefense programs..