Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is prepping House Republicans for a spending battle with Senate Democrats, opting for a strategy that pleases former President Trump and hard-line conservatives but complicates the path to averting a government shutdown at the end of the month.

The plan — which pairs a six-month continuing resolution (CR) with a Trump-supported bill to require proof of citizenship to register to vote — grants a win to the House Freedom Caucus, which pushed for a longer stopgap that includes the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act. But it is already drawing doubts from rank-and-file members who are skeptical it will prove effective and concerned it could damage the party electorally.

Those dynamics are thrusting Johnson into a familiar yet thorny situation: caught between firebrand hard-liners and apprehensive moderates, staring down a Senate Democratic majority, and scrambling to fund the government with just weeks to go until the Sept. 30 shutdown deadline.

Johnson rolled out his opening salvo in the spending battle during a House GOP conference call Wednesday, arguing that the length of the CR — which would stave off a shutdown through March 2025 — is the only “practical” option, according to a source on the call.

“[It] has a lot of merit,” Johnson said of the CR-plus-SAVE Act legislation, the source added.

Other Republicans, however, were not immediately convinced, with members acknowledging that the Democratic-controlled Senate is all but certain to reject the package. The Biden administration opposes the SAVE Act, noting noncitizen voting is already illegal and expressing worries about eligible voters being blocked from voter rolls if enacted.

“We all know the only thing that will get through is a clean cr! Other than that it’s shut down city!” one member on the call told The Hill in a text message, calling the gambit “fruitless.” The lawmaker, however, said they would support the effort.

At least two Republicans have already come out against the proposal. Rep. Thomas Massie (Ky.) told The Hill he will vote no on the bill, and Rep. Matt Rosendale (Mont.) derided the legislation as a “messaging bill.”

And Rep. Nick LaLota (N.Y.) — one of the 17 Republicans representing districts President Biden won in 2020 — asked Johnson on the call what the conference will do if the Senate sends back a “clean” CR. He warned that a shutdown at the end of the month would jeopardize 10 incumbents, according to the source on the call.

Johnson, nonetheless, is plowing full steam ahead. The Speaker responded to LaLota by saying they cannot assume the strategy will fail, the source said, and that Republicans will have to want to win.

LaLota later told The Hill he would vote “yes” on the CR-SAVE Act bill.

The early opposition — and lingering skepticism — creates a complicated situation for Johnson, who will need near-unanimity from the House GOP conference to get his CR-plus-SAVE Act over the finish line amid widespread Democratic resistance. Republicans can only afford to lose four members on any party-line vote.

Democrats are already signaling their opposition, with House Appropriations Committee ranking member Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) taking particular aim at the length of the CR.

“We need a continuing resolution because House Republicans let their most extreme members drive the ship,” DeLauro said, in reference to GOP disputes tanking or blocking multiple partisan regular funding bills earlier this year. “A continuing resolution that ends in December — rather than one that lasts a half year — is better for our national security and military readiness, veterans and their families, victims recovering from natural disasters, and all hardworking American taxpayers. Let us hope the majority does not drive us straight to a Republican shutdown.”

Republicans in support of the gambit, however, are hopeful the plan could help them gain leverage in the funding fight.

The House approved the SAVE Act in July in a 221-198 vote. Five vulnerable Democrats — Reps. Henry Cuellar (Texas), Don Davis (N.C.), Jared Golden (Maine), Vicente Gonzalez (Texas) and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.) — joined all Republicans in support of the measure, which has since languished in the Senate. 

The theory from the hard-liners is that pairing the bills could force Democrats to take another look at the voting legislation — or place the burden of a potential shutdown on the Democrats.

“Let them own it,” said Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), a Freedom Caucus member.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), the lead sponsor of the SAVE Act and top advocate of the plan to pair it with the CR, said House Republicans should “unite around something that is pretty easily sellable.”

“Republicans can sit around and hand-wringing and do their usual claptrap, or they can get on board, unite and then figure out how we’re going to strategize through the next two months,” Roy told The Hill in an interview. “But we got to figure out what we’re going to do about government funding, and we got to figure out what we’re going to do about picking a fight that differentiates us from Democrats.”

Pairing the SAVE Act with the CR also grants a request from Trump, who has continued to focus on unsubstantiated allegations of illegal voting as the calendar inches closer to Election Day. Trump — who appeared alongside Johnson to roll out the SAVE Act in April — waded into the spending debate last week, saying on Monica Crowley’s podcast that he “would shut down the government in a heartbeat if they don’t get it.”

And it could help Johnson down the line as he looks to remain at the top of the House GOP conference. Those assessing Johnson’s prospects for keeping his spot at the helm next year have watched closely to see how he handles the spending deadline. Adopting the tactic pushed by conservatives and Trump could put him in their good graces.

Perhaps more important than the voting bill, however, is that the conservative push to extend funding into 2025 aims to avoid an end-of-year omnibus negotiated by party leaders that is favorable to Democrats but abhorred by conservative hard-liners. Rather than approving the funding under a lame-duck President Biden, they say, it could set up a potential new Trump administration to fund its own priorities.

Roy indicated to The Hill last week that if Republicans can unite behind a SAVE Act-plus-CR that the Senate rejects, negotiators can figure out an “off-ramp” that prioritizes avoiding an end-of-year-omnibus.

The source on the Wednesday House GOP call said Johnson alluded to the idea that the six-month CR could give Trump an opportunity to influence government funding if he wins the White House. He also argued that any CR into December would likely get pushed until March anyway, making the six-month stopgap the only “practical” path forward.

Not all House Republicans are sold on that logic. One warned against making assumptions about the election cycle — and how spending negotiations could complicate the start of the new Congress.

“You’re going to put brand new members that just got elected on a really tough vote on an appropriations package when they don’t even understand the appropriations process,” the member said, noting Congress will also have to deal with the debt limit in January.

Even if Trump wins, the member said, his new administration may not be equipped to handle a spending deadline so soon.

“How in the world do you expect to get an administration settled and in place and then have a debt ceiling fight and an appropriations fight without having the proper folks in place?” the House Republican said.

Trump’s campaign did not answer The Hill’s questions about whether he supports a stopgap lasting into 2025.

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), a moderate who hails from a swing district, told The Hill he prefers a shorter CR because “our military struggles with a six-month CR.”

“There’s a lot of major programs going on that are affected by a long-term CR,” he said. “If I could advocate, I would prefer a shorter CR, mainly for our national security. But if it’s that or a shutdown, obviously, we prefer to not shut down.”

Some fiscal hawks, meanwhile, are outright opposed to the package, raising questions about whether the GOP will have the votes for the package next week.

Rosendale, who is opposed to any type of CR in principle, criticized the CR-plus-SAVE Act plan in a post on the social platform X, saying Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) will not be convinced to consider the SAVE Act simply because it is attached to a CR.

And Massie told The Hill he will vote against the package next week because he would prefer a CR that lasts a full year — allowing for automatic 1 percent spending cuts that he had championed as part of a different deal last year to kick in, if the CR extends past April 30.

As Johnson prepares to move on the CR-plus-SAVE Act package, House Republicans are buckling up for what will likely be a rollercoaster of a process — a bitter funding fight with the 2024 election in the backdrop. Bacon, however, expressed confidence Johnson will avert a shutdown and force a compromise with Senate Democrats and the White House.

“Most people don’t like shutdowns; it’s a sign of dysfunctional government. And I believe Speaker Johnson feels the same way. I’ve talked to him many times,” Bacon said. “I trust Speaker Johnson. I think he’s earned my trust on these things. I believe in the end he’ll negotiate with the Senate and the president and the ranking members, and we’ll go from there.”

Aris Folley contributed.