A second House Republican told Mike Johnson on Tuesday that he will sign on to an attempt to end his speakership, according to two lawmakers in the room — meaning Johnson would almost certainly need Democratic votes to retain his gavel if his rivals move against him.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said during a closed-door GOP meeting that he would back Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene‘s (R-Ga.) effort amid rising conservative frustration with the speaker’s proposed foreign aid package. Massie is the first Republican to commit to supporting her. It’s still unclear when Greene plans to force the ouster vote, though she has vowed to do it eventually.

“You’re not going to be the speaker much longer,” Massie told Johnson, according to two lawmakers in the room.

On Monday evening, Johnson announced his plans to send four separate bills to the floor — on aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, plus a fourth with other miscellaneous provisions. That sparked pushback from Greene and some other conservatives, who have opposed attempts to send further cash to Ukraine. Given that resistance, Johnson would likely need Democratic support to bring those bills to the floor, which could further incite GOP hard-liners in any ouster vote.

Massie confirmed his plans to back Greene in a post on X during the conference meeting. He added that Johnson “should pre-announce his resignation (as Boehner did), so we can pick a new Speaker without ever being without a GOP Speaker.”

Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) said Massie’s announcement was “not received very well” in the private GOP conference meeting. Majority Leader Steve Scalise said afterward that he still thinks they can avoid a vote to terminate Johnson’s speakership.

“Folks are very discouraged. … We are screwed,” said one Republican lawmaker, granted anonymity to speak candidly.

Democrats aren’t yet committing to backing Johnson’s plan on foreign aid, saying they need to see the substance of the bills. And while a handful of lawmakers in the party said they would help Johnson keep his gavel if he put Ukraine aid on the House floor, it’s unclear if they’ll count his current plan as fulfilling his end of the bargain.

Democrats were told in their private conference meeting Tuesday that the money to Ukraine would still effectively be a grant, because the loan language Johnson is considering would make it difficult for Ukraine to ever pay back the money, according to one person in the room. Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly pushed to structure any further aid to Ukraine as a loan, an idea some Republicans have embraced.

If Johnson’s foreign aid plan passes the House, its fate in the Senate is uncertain. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Tuesday that he is “reserving judgment” on the package, and he and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell have both repeatedly called on Johnson to pass their bipartisan foreign aid bill.

Anthony Adragna and Ursula Perano contributed to this report.

The Senate is set to begin an impeachment trial this week for Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas — the first of its kind in nearly 150 years — after weeks of delay.

Mayorkas became the second Cabinet secretary ever impeached last month, after the GOP-controlled House’s second try succeeded.

Republicans have channeled their outrage over the record number of border crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border into the effort to oust Mayorkas, alleging that he is refusing to enforce immigration laws. Democrats frame the fight as a policy disagreement between the GOP and the White House, hoping to end the proceedings quickly.

Here’s what to expect:

Dems need speed: Senate Democrats aren’t interested in a full trial, where House Republicans make their case for removing Mayorkas, and will try to keep it as short as possible.

“We’re going to try to resolve this issue as quickly as impossible. Impeachment should never be used to settle policy disagreements,” Schumer said last week.

The Senate must summon Mayorkas to let him know the charges he faces and ask for a written answer. But he would not have to appear in the Senate at any point; don’t expect him to.

The process will be led by Senate President Pro Tempore Patty Murray (D-Wash.). Unlike presidential impeachments, the chief justice of the supreme court is not involved.

Dem dismissal? Democrats hold the Senate majority. If they stand united, they could dismiss the trial outright or move to table the two articles of impeachment.

That would effectively end the House effort and free the upper chamber to pursue other business. No Democrats thus far have voiced support for impeaching Mayorkas.

Schumer has not been concrete about his plans, other than a desire to keep the process short.

Multiple GOP senators have lamented a trial as a waste of time, given the expected outcome in the Democratic-controlled chamber. But it’s not clear that sentiment would drive any to dismiss the charges from the outset.

Mitt Romney (R-Utah) was unclear last week at what point in the process he could voice his view: “Mayorkas has done a terrible job, but he’s following the direction of the President and has not met the constitutional test of a high criminal crime or misdemeanor.”

Reaching for referral: If Democrats are unable to unanimously dismiss or table the articles, they have the option of voting to create a trial committee that would investigate the charges against Mayorkas.

This would follow the precedent of several trials of federal judges in the last 100 years.

There aren’t hard and fast rules for the committee referral process. But in the past, the Senate has moved a resolution to authorize party leaders to appoint six senators and a chair, authorize the calling of witnesses and issue a final report.

Democrats would largely like to avoid this path as it would keep the GOP allegations against Mayorkas and the Biden administration alive heading into an election where border security is expected to be a major issue.

GOP seeks to stretch it out: Mike Lee (R-Utah) and some of his conservative GOP colleagues have pledged to try and force a full trial, or at least utilize procedural delay tactics to drag out out as long as possible.

They argue the Senate has a constitutional obligation to hear the arguments for and against impeachment from the House managers.

Lee is expected to make multiple points of order and possibly force votes. But if Democrats stand united, they can table all of Lee’s attempts.

Ursula Perano contributed to this report.

Speaker Mike Johnson told GOP lawmakers that he’ll try to pass four measures this week to send aid to Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan — each in separate bills, according to multiple Republicans in the private Monday meeting.

A fourth proposed bill, which is still being finalized, would include a package of related measures, including a lend-lease deal for military aid, a ban on TikTok in the U.S. and provisions to sell off assets seized from Russian oligarchs.

It’s far from certain that Johnson would have the votes to bring the bills to the floor, given the procedural hurdles of Republicans’ narrow majority that have vexed the speaker for months. Johnson would need near-unanimous support from his own conference to bring the whole package of bills up for passage, a procedure known as a rules vote, plus prior approval from a Rules Committee stacked with conservatives who may resist based on Ukraine aid.

Earlier Monday, hardliners in the House Freedom Caucus released a statement saying they opposed using necessary cash for Israel to “ram through Ukraine aid.” And several members of the group declined on Monday night as they left the closed-door meeting to say if they would support bringing the bills to the floor at this point.

“The American people have made it as clear as they possibly could … that we better secure our border before we spend more money in Ukraine. They are getting ready to fly off the cliff,” Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.) said. Conservative Reps. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), Chip Roy (R-Texas), Bob Good (R-Va.) and Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) each also declined to say if they would vote to bring the package to the floor.

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), another Freedom Caucus member, said that he “likes that it’s separate bills.” But pressed if that meant he would help bring the package to the floor, he demurred: “We haven’t even seen the bills, I mean good grief.”

If even a handful of conservatives oppose the rule vote, then Johnson would need Democratic support to move forward — and it’s incredibly rare for the minority party to assist on those rules votes. House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries declined to comment Monday on whether he expected his caucus would support the package: “We’re not going to come to any conclusion about process until we understand the substance.”

Other GOP members are already drawing red lines that Johnson is unlikely to meet because they would threaten to sink Ukraine aid in the Senate. For example, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) said Republicans should incorporate language that mandates the Senate vote on a House-passed, conservative-favored border security bill before it can take up a Ukraine aid package.

“I think the Senate should have to take a vote on our border security legislation before we are just giving a blank check,” Gaetz told reporters, adding that his idea got a positive reaction within the meeting.

Plus, Johnson has a looming threat to his speakership, with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) vowing to force a vote to oust him. She said Monday that she hadn’t made a decision on when to triggering that process, but that she’s “firmly against the plan as it stands right now.” She called it “another wrong direction for Speaker Johnson.”

“He’s definitely not going to be speaker next Congress,” Greene said, adding it was “to be determined” if he would even finish out this term. No GOP lawmakers have explicitly said they would join Greene in voting to boot Johnson.

Republicans are still waiting to see when Greene will follow through with her threat to fire Johnson, who brushed off the chance that the foreign aid strategy will lead to his potential ouster.

“I don’t spend my time worrying about motions to vacate. We’re having to govern here, and we’re gonna do our job. I’m not sure how that shakes out,” he said.

The speaker also told members that there would be amendment votes included in the package, though it’s unclear what those would be. Notably absent from his proposal: any measures to address border security, which Republicans have demanded for months. Conservatives said they would push for amendment votes on border security policies as part of the House’s debate.

“There’ll be a possibility for amendments. But the question is how many — they’ll have to be germane,” said Rep. Chuck Fleischmann (R-Tenn.). “But let’s face it, he had to make the play call. And I think he’s made a very good play call, given the totality of the circumstances where the world is right now.”

The speaker said he’s committed to abiding by a House rule that gives lawmakers a full 72 hours to review the legislation, once it’s finalized. That would likely push passage votes to Friday evening.

If the House passed more than one of the four bills, it’s unclear if they would be packaged together before heading to the Senate. While GOP lawmakers said the upper chamber would have to take separate votes on each piece of legislation, Johnson told reporters after the meeting that he hadn’t yet decided whether to send whatever bills pass over as a comprehensive package.

It’s unclear if Johnson has Senate support for his proposal, given the upper chamber’s leaders are continuing to insist on their own bipartisan version of foreign aid legislation that combines cash for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.

“We’re discussing whether they would be merged together in one package that’s sent to the Senate, or if it goes over as individual measures. My personal preference is to do it individually, but we’ll let the body decide. We’ll have further discussion on that in the morning,” Johnson said.

Katherine Tully-McManus, Nicholas Wu and Connor O’Brien contributed to this report.

A newly established outside group with ties to California Democrats is hitting Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) as not conservative enough, seeking to boost his GOP primary opponent for a Pennsylvania swing seat.

POLITICO obtained mailers sent by the group — True Patriots PA, established on April 5 — hitting the incumbent. One says ”We sent Brian Fitzpatrick to D.C. to represent our values — instead, he became best friends with Kamala Harris and the Democrats” and another says “MAGA is ready to bag the biggest RINO in Congress.”

The group’s treasurer, Meagan Olson, is listed as Sacramento, California-based and also separately as the treasurer for Rep. Eric Swalwell’s (D-Calif.) campaign. She did not immediately respond to request for comment. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee declined to comment.

Ben Trundy, a spokesperson for the Fitzpatrick campaign, said the move indicated the Democrats believe they have “no chance of beating Congressman Fitzpatrick” so they are boosting his primary opponent, Mark Houck.

“This lame attempt to prop up Mark Houck … shows just how desperate they are to force their extreme policies on Bucks and Montgomery County voters,” he added.

Houck is an anti-abortion activist who drew national attention for comments he made saying he “struggled” with pornography. His campaign did not immediately comment on whether he supported the outside group’s assistance.

Fitzpatrick — co-chair of the centrist Problem Solvers’ Caucus — twice did not support impeaching former President Donald Trump, and has won reelection in his district even as President Joe Biden carried it in 2020.

The Pennsylvania GOP primary is April 23.

All eyes this week will be on the House as they seek to pass aid for Israel — and maybe Ukraine — following strikes launched by Iran against Israel over the weekend.

Speaker Mike Johnson was not specific during a Sunday interview on what his chamber would move forward with this week. “The details of that package are being put together right now,” he said on Fox News. “We’re looking at the options and all these supplemental issues.”

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer indicated congressional leaders were resolute in their support following a Sunday call between them and President Joe Biden: “There was a consensus on the phone among all the leaders that we had to help Israel and help Ukraine, and now hopefully we can work that out and get this done next week,” he said at a New York press conference.

Among the items listed for possible consideration is a resolution declaring the slogan ‘‘from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’’ is antisemitic and condemning its use. It’s listed for consideration under suspension of the rules, which would require a two-thirds vote for passage. It’s one of 17 legislative items listed for possible consideration by the chamber this week.

House Republicans are expected to meet in late Monday afternoon to discuss the attack and foreign aid supplemental package. More than 90 House members, including Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), urgedJohnson to take up the Senate-passed measure in a letter.

Over in the Senate, lawmakers must deal with a reauthorization of a controversial spy powers program, known formally as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, before it expires April 19. It may not be easy, with opponents vowing to fight, though the Biden administration is rallying support for speedy passage.

“At a moment of increasing threats and instability abroad, the only way to ensure this critical intelligence tool does not expire on Friday is for the Senate to take up the House bill and pass it expeditiously,” said Matthew Olsen, assistant attorney general for national security.

The House passed a reauthorization on a bipartisan basis last Friday. As always, though, any one senator can slow consideration of legislation.

The articles of impeachment Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas are expected to be walked over by the House managers on Tuesday, though we’ll see if the weekend attack further scrambles the timing there.

For today, though: Senators will be voting on reappointing a judge to the Northern Mariana Islands.

They turned the reversal of Roe v. Wade into campaign rocket fuel two years ago, denying the GOP its hopes for a “red wave.” Now House Democrats are preparing to try to again sink vulnerable Republicans on abortion.

Internal party polling data backs up their strategy. Democratic lawmakers viewed a recent survey from their campaign arm during a private meeting on Wednesday that pointed to abortion’s status as a “dealbreaker” for key constituencies ahead of November. The poll, described to POLITICO by a person in the room, found 43 percent of women and 31 percent of independents saying they could not vote for a candidate for Congress who disagreed with them on abortion.

The same polling showed 69 percent of respondents in battleground districts believing that GOP control of the House, Senate and White House would lead to significant restrictions on abortion. The result remained largely the same regardless of whether the respondent was in a state with restricted or accessible abortion. (Notably, the polling was conducted before former President Donald Trump said he’d punt the issue to the states.)

It may prove more challenging than Democrats expect to link swing-district Republicans to state-level abortion restrictions. Voters will also face a messaging bombardment about the economy, the border, crime and other issues that typically put Democrats on defense — though Alabama’s recent court ruling restricting in vitro fertilization yielded messaging that took advantage of GOP vulnerabilities.

Broadly speaking, Trump’s new abortion position is prompting many GOP lawmakers to distance themselves from any further congressional action to ban it. Battleground-seat Republicans have lined up to repudiate Arizona’s new abortion ban after a seismic court decision reinstated it.

“Just like Democrats, Republicans have different views on the issue,” said purple-district Rep. Marc Molinaro (R-N.Y.), who has opposed a national abortion ban. “My view is very, very clear and very, very simple. I believe that we need to respect women and the choices that they have to make.”

But Democrats are still preparing to yoke their opponents to the restrictions anyway. If they succeed, they’ll be harmonizing with President Joe Biden’s reelection, which is putting abortion rights front and center.

“Some have tried to rhetorically separate themselves, but when it comes to actual work in terms of the bills they support, the votes they’ve taken, they’re not supporting reproductive freedom across this country,” said DCCC chair Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.), who was confident voters would still see abortion as a top issue. “The data hasn’t changed,” she added. “We’ve seen this consistently since the Dobbs decision [ending Roe].”

Lawmakers are anticipating a media barrage to make the case to voters on abortion. The message: If Republicans take back the Senate, keep the House and take the White House, they will pass a national abortion ban. (Trump has said he opposes a national abortion ban).

“It’s very important that we communicate that even in states where the right to abortion exists on the state level, [that] a national abortion ban, which [Republicans are seeking] and will seek, will overturn the right to abortion, even in states like New York and California,” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). “I think we really need to be very sharp about the stakes of this as something that we have to continue to emphasize.”

One Michigan Democrat pointed to voters approving an amendment to the state’s constitution in 2022 — after the Dobbs decision — guaranteeing the right to abortion and other reproductive health services as evidence of its down-ballot potency.

“This was clearly a question that was front of mind and it made a huge difference in the Michigan election, statewide and district by district, down to the legislative races,” said Rep. Dan Kildee (D-Mich.). He acknowledged the difficulty of keeping the issue “in the political consciousness” but added that Republicans were “doing it for us. They cannot get out of their own way and they’re gonna pay a price for it, I believe.”

Not every lawmaker thinks abortion should be a central part of the party’s election year message. Rep. Susan Wild (D-Pa.), who represents a purple district narrowly won by Biden in 2020, said “I don’t spend a lot of time talking about abortion in my race.” She said she didn’t last cycle, either.

“Quite frankly, I think the voters are aware of the national news. They’re aware enough that you don’t have to spend a whole lot of time talking about it,” she said.