The Archive

WASHINGTON X THE WORLD

What the speaker of Ukraine’s parliament told Johnson

It’s no coincidence that the speaker of Ukraine’s parliament, the country’s defense minister and a top presidential adviser are visiting Capitol Hill this week.

As Congress remains without a clear path for additional Ukraine funding, President Volodymyr Zelensky’s top lieutenants are on a critical mission to preserve Ukraine’s key lifeline — help from the United States. That means making the case directly to Congress’ Ukraine skeptics.

Perhaps their most important meeting came on Tuesday afternoon when Speaker Mike Johnson — who previously voted against Ukraine aid — hosted Ruslan Stefanchuk, the speaker of Ukraine’s parliament.

“We have come a long way on our path to victory. But we cannot stop halfway,” Stefanchuk told Punchbowl News in an interview Tuesday night at the Ukrainian embassy. “Ukraine is fighting against the most appalling and terrible regime since the times of Hitler.”

Stefanchuk leads Ukraine’s parliamentary body, known as the Verkhovna Rada. The 48-year-old is a close ally of Zelensky and is next in line to the presidency. Stefanchuk is an experienced political hand who knew exactly what he was walking into with Johnson.

While Johnson has spoken recently about the need to defeat Vladimir Putin, he’s also one of the chief obstacles to passing more Ukraine aid.

Johnson is against the idea of a comprehensive foreign aid package, and he’s privately telling Democrats they must accept border-security legislation they oppose in order to get more Ukraine funding. Johnson also reflects that skepticism on Ukraine that defines much of his conference — that there isn’t enough transparency about U.S. aid to Ukraine, and there aren’t any clearly defined objectives.

Yet make no mistake: Ukraine’s leaders are aware of exactly what’s happening on Capitol Hill right now — and they know their audience.

“We understand that this war cannot last forever. And we have a clear vision and plan… to carry on with this fight,” Stefanchuk said. “Every bullet that will be shot by a Ukrainian soldier at a Russian occupier, a bullet for which the American taxpayers have paid, will be reported and accounted for.”

Based on their meeting, Stefanchuk said Johnson was “positive about getting aid to Ukraine before Christmas.” Stefanchuk told us Johnson “fully understands” the domestic political issues at play here, and emphasized he doesn’t want to interfere.

At the same time, Stefanchuk said he came prepared with very specific counter-arguments to various claims about the war, including whether Ukraine’s big counter-offensive has stalled out.

“The war in Ukraine is not a computer game where you can just speed up using the control buttons,” Stefanchuk told us. “The speed of advancement of the Ukrainian troops directly depends on the speed of the deliveries of weapons to Ukraine.”

In many ways, Stefanchuk echoed President Joe Biden and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who’ve highlighted the fact that most of the U.S. aid for Ukraine is spent at home rather than sent overseas. Stefanchuk repeatedly said it’s a “mutually beneficial” proposition for the United States.

To those concerned about the cost of sustaining Ukraine’s military, Stefanchuk said the cost of a Russian victory would be far greater — both in dollars and in American lives.

“We understand that the spending is high. But at the same time, if God forbid Russia wins, America would have to spend way more because Putin wouldn’t stop,” Stefanchuk said, referencing Article 5 of NATO.

— Andrew Desiderio

THE SENATE

The lasting wounds from Senate Republicans’ Tuberville mess

Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s (R-Ala.) military promotions blockade may be over, but the bad blood from the standoff will reverberate among Senate Republicans for a long time to come.

The Alabama Republican’s 10-month-long effort ended Tuesday with nothing to show for it. Tuberville initially used the nomination blockade as leverage to push the Pentagon to scrap its controversial abortion leave policy.

The issue roiled the Senate GOP Conference in recent months as it became clear that Tuberville wasn’t going to win. Still, Tuberville kept at it — winning fans on the right in the process — until the situation became unbearable for GOP defense hawks. They all but said they’d vote for a Democratic proposal to quash the blockade if Tuberville didn’t end it.

Tuberville told us he has “zero” regrets. But one of his detractors says she wishes her party tried to head off the saga sooner.

“If we had started much sooner, maybe working with the House on a lawsuit, maybe we could have avoided some of this rather than focusing on holding innocent men and women,” said Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), a defense hawk who co-led the charge against Tuberville’s blockade.

Led by Ernst and Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), a group of Republican veterans eventually said enough was enough, taking to the Senate floor to demand that Tuberville end the blockade immediately.

Tuberville’s allies in this fight — GOP senators like Mike Lee of Utah and Roger Marshall of Kansas — pushed back. Conservative groups including Heritage piled on. Eventually, it became a near-daily discussion at Senate GOP lunches sometimes devolving into arguments between Tuberville’s allies and antagonists, as we’ve reported.

Here’s how Ernst described the pushback she got from fellow conservatives:

In the end, the Pentagon’s abortion policy is still in place — a fact that Tuberville’s detractors are emphasizing.

“This guy upended the lives of 400 of our heroes for almost a year — and for what?” a GOP senator, who requested anonymity, lamented.

The standoff prompted Sen. Katie Britt (R-Ala.), who has so far shunned the spotlight, to serve as an intermediary between Tuberville, his critics and members of GOP leadership, according to sources familiar with her role. Britt, seen as a rising star in the Senate, made clear she wanted to show support for her fellow Alabamian while also working to resolve the impasse.

— Andrew Desiderio

What top bank CEOs will say to the Senate today

Executives representing some of the world’s most important banks will testify before the Senate Banking Committee today. Here’s what you need to know.

This hearing — the initial planning of which we scooped back in September — has become an almost annual ritual at this point. Senate Banking Committee Chair Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) told us Tuesday that “it’s about keeping them accountable.”

The CEOs testifying today include JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon, Citigroup’s Jane Fraser, Bank of America’s Brian Moynihan, Wells Fargo’s Charlie Scharf, State Street’s Ronald O’Hanley, BNY Mellon’s Robin Vince, Goldman Sachs’ David Solomon and Morgan Stanley’s James Gorman. You can read each of their written testimonies here.

“They control such a huge part of the economy, and this is an economy [where] the rich are getting richer and the middle class struggles,” Brown said. As part of the hearing, the committee released this fact sheet Monday night listing each CEO’s compensation package and a handful of recent headlines either featuring scandals or announcements of shareholder buybacks.

But we expect a predominant focus of this session from both Democrats and Republicans will be ongoing reforms of banks’ capital requirements, a regulatory effort led by Michael Barr, vice chair for supervision at the Federal Reserve.

The banking sector has been a top target in Washington in recent years, from credit card reform to “junk fee” crackdowns to anti-ESG political blowback. But nothing has captured the industry’s ire like capital reform, which includes a series of changes referred to as “Basel III” as well as tweaks to banks’ calculation of long-term debt risks.

The Biden administration’s banking regulators say more capital is needed to shore up the financial system. Banks, meanwhile, have accused the government of failing to show adequate analysis to back up its proposals.

“This isn’t just a matter of impacting big banks,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.). “Basel III endgame will impact consumers, and it’s going to decrease the amount of credit available to families.”

Centrist Democrats also have their share of concerns about capital reform. Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) said he worried about the “timing” of capital reform, which we’ve heard before. But Warner said he’d also try to hear the bank execs out while maintaining a bit of skepticism.

“The banking community always says, anytime there’s new regulation, the sky is falling,” Warner said.

Bank executives are also almost always harranged about climate change when they appear in Washington, whether that’s doing too little to address its risks or doing too much to appease activists.

Case in point: Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) said he’d want to ask “why these banks have allowed the financial system to become so politicized,” while Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said he’d expect an update on “where they are on meeting their climate goals, including de-risking their energy portfolios.”

— Brendan Pedersen

A CONVERSATION ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND MENTAL HEALTH

On Tuesday evening we hosted “A Conversation on Social Media and Mental Health,” an event featuring a fireside chat with Dr. Zainab Okolo, SVP of Policy, Advocacy and Government Relations at The Jed Foundation, and Wanji Walcott, Chief Legal Officer at Pinterest. The conversation was followed by a reception with drinks and light bites. Thank you to Pinterest for partnering with us on this event.

Raising a glass: Emily Gustafson and Colleen Kincaid of the American Hospital Association; Francisco Hardacker and Patricia Ordaz of the Senate Democratic Steering and Outreach Committee; Jessica Kirchner of the National Governors Association; Victoria French and Kirsten Feyling of the Elizabeth Dole Foundation; Michael Linskey of the National Alliance on Mental Illness; Mandar Jadhav of the National Association of Community Health Centers; and Khara Boender of the Computer & Communications Industry Association.

GAVEL WATCH

Members brace for ‘absolute melee’ over McHenry’s successor

The Republican chair of the House Financial Services Committee isn’t running for reelection in 2024, and who his successor will be is anyone’s guess.

Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) announced his retirement Tuesday, ending months of speculation about the longtime lawmaker’s future plans.

This is a big, big deal for the financial services world. The House Financial Services Committee is among Washington’s most powerful panels, overseeing both the banking industry and top agency regulators while also wielding enormous influence over financial policy writ large.

Let’s start with the warm and fuzzy stuff: Lawmakers in both parties lamented the coming departure of McHenry, who has served in the House since 2005 and cemented a reputation as an even-handed dealmaker.

Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), another veteran lawmaker on the House Financial Services Committee, said he was “devastated” and “shocked” by the news.

“I think he’s one of the real voices of sanity around here,” Himes said. “This institution is going to be a lot weaker for his absence.”

A few Republicans we spoke to said they were surprised as well, including Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Mo.). Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) said it was “a loss to Congress, but I’m happy for whatever is next for Patrick.”

OK, enough of that. Let’s talk gavel politics.

There’s an unusually deep Republican bench on the financial services panel, with a half dozen lawmakers who could make a credible run for the GOP spot. That list extends beyond the roster of subcommittee chairs.

“You’re going to have an absolute melee on the financial services committee,” Rep. Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) told us Tuesday. The longest serving member on the committee today, Lucas didn’t rule out a run himself when asked, we should note. Lucas currently chairs the House Science Committee.

But as we wrote Tuesday, there are two lawmakers effectively at the top of the pile for now: Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.), the committee’s current vice chair, and Luetkemeyer, a former banker who’s already expressed an interest in the job.

“We’ll see how it plays out,” Luetkemeyer told us in a brief conversation Tuesday. Hill declined to comment on the chairmanship, saying he was “not going to discuss that today.” Barr, another potential contender, likewise punted, saying he was “not going to get into that speculation.”

We’ll have more tomorrow on what happens to the panel if Democrats win the House.

— Brendan Pedersen

THE CAMPAIGN

Here’s an interesting fundraiser that took place Tuesday night. Senate Minority Whip John Thune hosted a dinner for Montana Republican Senate candidate Tim Sheehy, who’s the establishment favorite to take on Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). Many Senate Republicans and the NRSC have rallied around Sheehy, but the first-time candidate could face a primary challenge from Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.).

Tickets ranged from $1,000 to $5,000 to attend.

News: EMILY’s List is endorsing state Rep. Julie Johnson in the Democratic primary for Texas’ 32nd District. Johnson is running to succeed Rep. Colin Allred (D-Texas), who’s seeking the Senate seat. Johnson was first elected to the Texas state legislature in 2018. She’s also been endorsed by the Equality PAC and the Human Rights Campaign.

— Max Cohen