House Passes $40 Billion More in Ukraine Aid, With Few Questions Asked

The escalating brutality of the war in Ukraine has dampened voices on both the right and left skeptical of the United States’ involving itself in armed conflict overseas, fueling a rush by Congress to pour huge amounts of money into a potentially lengthy and costly offensive against Russia with few questions or reservations raised.

Under pressure to present a united front as President Vladimir V. Putin’s forces carry out a campaign of atrocities across Ukraine, lawmakers in both political parties who have previously railed against skyrocketing military budgets and entanglements in intractable conflicts abroad have gone largely silent about what is fast becoming a major military effort drawing on American resources.

The House on Tuesday night passed a $39.8 billion military and humanitarian aid package for Ukraine in an overwhelming 368 to 57 vote, weeks after lawmakers overwhelmingly approved $13.6 billion in emergency aid for the war effort. That total — roughly $53 billion over two months — goes beyond what President Biden requested and is poised to amount to the largest foreign aid package to move through Congress in at least two decades.

It also comes at a time when the two parties have been unable to reach agreement to invest in domestic programs. They include the extension of a tax credit that pulled millions of American children out of poverty and even a pandemic response package to control the spread of the coronavirus, as Republicans and some Democrats raise concerns that such spending could exacerbate inflation and increase the federal deficit.

But stunned by the grisly images from Ukraine and leery of turning their backs on a country whose suffering has been on vivid display for the world, many lawmakers have put aside their skepticism and quietly agreed to the sprawling tranches of aid, keeping to themselves their concerns about the war and questions about the Biden administration’s strategy for American involvement.

And as Mr. Biden’s requests to Congress for money to fund the war effort have spiraled upward, leaders in both parties have largely refrained from questioning them. Instead, the packages have swelled to accommodate the two parties’ competing priorities, with Republicans adding money for military assistance and Democrats insisting that be matched by an equal addition for humanitarian aid.

They have been backed by pleas of urgency from both Ukrainian leaders and the Biden administration, which warned Congress this week that more aid would be needed before May 19 to continue providing military support.

On Tuesday, hours before the House was to vote, Oksana Markarova, the Ukrainian ambassador to the United States, met separately with Republicans and Democrats in the Senate, where the measure is now headed, to personally call for swift passage of the package.

“Her people are dying. They’re running out of supplies and ammunition. They need our help quickly,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat, describing Ms. Markarova’s message as: “Thank you for all our help, but please speed it up.”

The result has been that, at least for now, Congress is quickly and nearly unanimously embracing historic tranches of foreign aid with little public debate about the Biden administration’s strategy, whether the volume of military assistance could escalate the conflict, or whether domestic priorities are being pushed aside to accommodate the huge expenditures overseas.

“Time is of the essence — and we cannot afford to wait,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California wrote to lawmakers in a letter on Tuesday ahead of the vote. “With this aid package, America sends a resounding message to the world of our unwavering determination to stand with the courageous people of Ukraine until victory is won.”

The package would provide $6 billion for weaponry, intelligence support, training and other defense assistance to Ukrainian forces, as well as $8.7 billion to replenish American equipment sent to the country. It would allocate $3.9 billion for European Command operations, including intelligence support and hardship pay for troops in the region.

It would allow Mr. Biden to authorize the speedy transfer of up to $11 billion of American equipment, weapons and defense supplies.

The legislation also would set aside $13.9 billion for the State Department, with the bulk going toward the Economic Support Fund to help Ukraine’s government continue to function. Another $4.4 billion would go to emergency food assistance in Ukraine and around the world, as the war disrupts the country’s food supply and distribution. The measure would devote $900 million to assistance for Ukrainian refugees, including housing, English language, trauma and support services.

While nearly 60 Republicans opposed the bill, only a handful of spoke up to outline their concerns with the legislation, arguing that the United States could not afford to spend so much abroad at a time when they argue the basic needs of American citizens are not being met. Only Republicans opposed the measure, citing its size and the rushed timeline.

The loudest voices in both parties were those declaring their full-throated support, arguing that failing to halt Mr. Putin’s campaign now would lead to a more costly conflict later.

“I think we’d all agree the most important thing going on in the world right now is the war in Ukraine,” said Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, recounting a recent phone call with Mr. Biden in which he said he had advised the president that the package should “move by itself and quickly.”

“He called back in about 15 minutes and agreed that we need to do this — Ukraine only, and quickly,” Mr. McConnell added. “I think we’re on the path to getting that done.”

Some lonely voices on Capitol Hill — mostly hard-right Republicans — emerged on Tuesday to express misgivings. They were buoyed by Donald Trump Jr., the eldest son of former President Donald J. Trump, and a handful of conservative advocacy groups that mobilized in opposition to the bill.

Representative Warren Davidson, Republican of Ohio and a former Army officer, said in an interview that he was concerned that in quickly approving the legislation without sufficient debate, Congress was essentially paving the way for Mr. Biden to shift the nation’s role in the world “from fighting everyone’s war to funding everyone’s war.”

“Was it urgent to get some aid to them early on? Absolutely,” Mr. Davidson said of Ukrainian forces.

But, he added, in earlier times of war, lawmakers had approved bills with sweeping, long-lasting ramifications, citing the Patriot Act and the 2001 law authorizing war against Al Qaeda that has since been stretched to permit open-ended combat against Islamist militant groups across the world.

“When you rush these things and don’t put the proper framework around them, bad things happen,” he said.

In the early weeks of the war in Ukraine, skeptical lawmakers in both parties were more open about their apprehension about the role of the United States in the conflict.

More than 40 lawmakers on the right and left signed a letter in February warning Mr. Biden that he would need to receive authorization from Congress before involving American forces in the war. Some progressive lawmakers fretted openly about the possible unforeseen consequences of shipping thousands of weapons to fighters in Ukraine, while a handful of conservatives argued that the war was simply not an issue for the United States to become involved in.

But as Mr. Putin’s campaign became increasingly barbaric and the Biden administration began to send more support to Ukraine, including quietly providing Ukrainian forces with crucial intelligence, those voices grew quieter.

Congressional leaders in both parties have also moved quickly to tamp down on those voices.

“This is a large package, but the need is great, and time is of the essence,” Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, said. “We have a moral obligation to stand with our friends in Ukraine. The fight they are in is a struggle between democracy and authoritarianism itself. We dare not relent swift action to help our friends in need.”

Each time Mr. Biden has requested Congress pass emergency aid, congressional leaders have significantly increased both the military and humanitarian funding. The legislation the House approved on Tuesday, for example, more than doubled the arms-transfer authority requested by Mr. Biden, effectively enabling him to dip into American stockpiles to send the Ukrainians more than twice as many weapons without coming back to Congress.

Each time, they have been urged to action by top Ukrainian officials who have proved masterful at rallying support for their cause. Lawmakers were moved to tears by President Volodymyr Zelensky’s emotional address to Congress in March.

Liberal Democrats have pointedly noted that the aid packages for Ukraine appeared to have a far easier path to the president’s desk than their domestic priorities. A $22.5 billion emergency coronavirus package has shrunk to less than half its size because of Republican demands that it be paid for with existing funds, and is mired in an election-year dispute over immigration.

“Our national defense is about helping the Ukrainians as they fight against an illegal and immoral Russian invasion,” said Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts. “But our national defense is also about strengthening our families and our own domestic economy.”

“The disconnect around here really frustrates me,” she added.

But when Ms. Pelosi visited the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv, and Poland to survey the wreckage wrought by Russian forces, liberals noted that she was accompanied by two powerful and outspoken antiwar progressives, Representatives Barbara Lee of California and Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, signaling the breadth of the American consensus behind Ukraine’s war effort.

“We should always have a debate, but the problem is that Ukraine is in the middle of a very intense war right now,” said Senator Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent who has often led the charge against increased military spending. “I think every day counts, and I think we have to respond as strongly and vigorously as we can.”

John Ismay and Luke Broadwater contributed reporting.