Trade for Aid?

The odds of Congress approving emergency military assistance to Ukraine may be incrementally improving. But a key unknown is the fate of the president's $9.2 billion request for humanitarian assistance for Gaza and Ukraine, a crucial issue for Democrats. 

It has been seven weeks since the Senate passed a $95 billion Ukraine/Israel assistance package by a vote of 70-29. For much of that time, House Speaker Mike Johnson has maintained publicly that the Senate bill would never get a vote in the House because it did not contain significant border reforms.  

But in recent days, he and Republicans have floated some new requests—ones President Biden and the White House seem to have come to terms with:

• Assistance in loans vs. grants. This proposal, first raised by former President Trump, satisfied some Republican critics of the Biden administration's approach and hasn’t triggered hardcore opposition from Democrats.

• Liquefied natural gas. Johnson has linked Ukraine aid with Biden lifting his moratorium on liquefied natural gas imports - a political home run for him personally as well as nearly all Republican members. There are signs Biden may be willing to play ball, despite progressive opposition.  

• REPO Act. A bipartisan bill to use some of Russia's frozen sovereign assets to assist Ukraine. Despite initial resistance, reports indicate the Biden administration has “quietly come around on the idea." 

Apart from some outstanding political and procedural questions, the biggest outstanding substantive issue is the fate of humanitarian assistance to Gaza and, by extension, Ukraine. House Republican staff have indicated the Speaker could release a framework for his bill as soon as later this week.  

If the bill Johnson ultimately releases and brings to the floor includes the elements listed above plus humanitarian assistance to Gaza, Democrats seem likely to be willing to help pass it and perhaps even help him keep his job afterward. If the bill doesn't include Gaza, the risks of failure are much higher and Johnson will have a harder time finding Democrats to support his speakership. 

Ahead of the 2024 presidential election, our Insights team is regularly speaking to a large online community of engaged voters in key battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. 

Independent voters in these battleground states share their concerns about the candidates: 

• “Trump should focus on resolving pending legal issues and getting his life in order. I’m not sure how he can think about running for president when he can’t handle his life and business problems.” – Georgia Independent

• “I’m not really sold on Joe Biden running for president again, but the alternative is not acceptable.” – Michigan Independent

• “Trump should stop being so bombastic and insulting. Focus more on your policy successes.” – Wisconsin Independent

If candidates want to reach Independent battleground voters before they completely tune out, the campaigns will need to focus much more on their plans for the future – not just on the pandemonium.

We’ll continue to track views of battleground state voters as the election season progresses. In the meantime, you can find our latest election update here.

​
There has been a significant rise in U.S. consumers’ interest in the issue of food additives and ingredients over the past decade. Our colleagues on the Food and Ag team report on how this trend has stirred policymakers and large consumer food brands to act at the state and federal level. 

In 2023, California became the first state to ban brominated vegetable oil, potassium bromate, propylparaben and Red Dye No. 3, citing a link to potential health complications. The law that will go into effect in 2027. Previously, Democratic state lawmaker Jesse Gabriel introduced a different proposal that would eliminate artificial food dyes in school meals. 

Similar bills are making their way through state legislatures in Illinois and New York – which added titanium dioxide to the list of blacklisted ingredients – and more are joining the fray. Food Safety Magazine reports that Pennsylvania is the latest state to introduce food additive legislation, taking aim at nine chemicals with two separate bills. The outlet also notes Kentucky is pushing for a federal-level prohibition on the sale or manufacture of food containing ingredients banned in other countries. 

Despite the enthusiasm, some groups are concerned that supporting the elimination of additives could lead consumers to believe there’s a systematic failure of the U.S. food safety system, per an opinion piece.