this is cnn breaking news. >> hello, again, everyone. thank you so much for joining me. this very busy saturday. i'm fredricka whitfield. breaking news this hours, just moments ago, you watched it live right here on cnn, the house

voted to pass a short-term funding bill that will keep the u.s. government open for 45 days. the bill includes natural disaster aid, but does not include funding for ukraine or the border. the last-minute hail mary from house speaker kevin mccarthy seems to have worked in the house, but the shutdown has not yet been averted. it is now up to the u.s. senate to pass this proposal. let's get right to cnn's manu raju on capitol hill. what is the latest? you're positioned to talk to anybody who comes and goes. what's being said? >> reporter: look, this is a frantic day that a government shutdown could be averted after republicans reversed course. speaker mccarthy capitulated after indicating for some time that he would not move forward with a bill if it did not cut spending and include funding for border security measures. he was forced to do so, even

though this passed with a significant amount of republican opposition, the final vote of the 335 voting yes, 91 voting no. 90 of those were republicans who voted no, one democrat, mike quigley of illinois who voted against it because it did not have ukraine funding. one of the things that lawmakers were saying -- i appreciate it. trying to interrupt my live shot here. there's been a lot of opposition from some of those conservative hard liners who warned against cutting a deal and working with democrats. that's what they were saying to speaker mccarthy. don't cut a deal with democrats and rely on democratic votes. that's exactly what happened on the house floor. that is one reason why there's concern among mccarthy's allies that there could be a vote in a matter of days to try to oust him from the speakership. i had a chance to catch up with some members of whether they would push for an ouster.

many are not saying, even as they expressed satisfaction with the speaker over his handling of the spending talks. >> i have confidence in the way this place is supposed to operate. and that's what we should have pushed for. 12 individual spending bills, this bipartisan muscle memory of governing by continuing resolutions and omnibus bills needs to come to an end. it shows the party is alive and well and there are so many members who are comfortable doing things the way they've been done since the mid-90s and that's why we have $33 trillion in debt and constituents who are frustrated because they can't afford gas in their car and the high cost of living, the mortgage rates, where they're at, because of this inflation, and the reckless spending that comes right here from washington, d.c. so this is something that we have got to get under control. we should have forced the senate to take up the four appropriations bills that the house has passed.

that should have been our play, to fund more than 70% of the federal government, to keep our military personnel paid, to keep our brave men and women on our border patrol paid. we should have forced them to come to the negotiating table and come to conference and hash out our differences with these four appropriations bills before there was another payday that was at risk of being missed. >> you would vote to oust the speaker? >> that isn't what we're talking about right now. >> matt gaetz has said that he relies on democratic votes, he'll no longer be speaker. >> i represent colorado's third district and my focus is getting the federal government funded as we ought to, with 12 individual spending bills like we promised everyone in january. unfortunately, now we're 45 days of the same bipartisan muscle memory of just a straight up-and-down vote and whatever is in it is good with us.

>> reporter: frustration there, but not saying whether she would join with the likes of congressman matt gaetz to try to push out the speaker. we expect that vote to happen in the coming days. he would need five republicans to do that if there was an unprecedented vote on the floor, something that has never happened before in american history. that is an issue for days ahead. the speaker said he's willing to have that fight on the floor if it comes to that, which is expected. now, the next thing to avoid a government shutdown is the senate. the bill will go to the senate side. there needs to be an agreement of all 100 senators to keep the government open for another 45 days. as you can see, in 45 days we could be right back to where we were, this frantic effort to avoid a shutdown. >> and you pressed her on it, but congresswoman boebert says it's really not about the ouster of mccarthy, from her colleagues it has been stated that if he

gets democratic votes in order to pass something, that's like the kiss of death. but this stopgap measure wouldn't have made it, wouldn't have received any passing had it not received democratic votes. so which is it? do you want the government to keep functioning, but do so without democratic support, otherwise he'll be punished? it's a little confusing, like a lot confusing. >> reporter: yeah, because the speaker tried to pass a short-term funding bill that had a lot of conservative priorities, spending cuts, border security measures. those same members voted against it because they had demanded that congress pass annual funding bills. congress rarely meets the deadline and typically needs a stopgap to avoid a shutdown. it left kevin mccarthy with very little room to maneuver. he needed democratic votes in order to keep the government open and that is where he

ultimately made the decision. let the democrats help carry this across the finish line. >> manu raju, thank you so much there on capitol hill. let's go to the white house. kayla is there. so, kayla, is the white house behind the senate possibly passing this after the house has? what is the feeling there? >> fred, i just spoke to a white house official who tells cnn that it would likely support that compromise continuing resolution that would keep the government open for 45 days for a few reasons. number one, it would keep the government open and it does include disaster relief funding and authorization for the federal aviation authority. number two, this official says that it does not include the 30% across-the-board spending cuts that many republicans were pushing to be included in previous short-term bills. number three, there's a belief within the white house that kevin mccarthy as house speaker has previously stated his

support for funding ukraine's defenses, and they believe that he will make good on that in separate measures, even though it is not included in that short-term bill that just passed the house. now, worth noting, the white house had previously lent its support to a senate brokered deal earlier in the week that did include $6.2 billion in funding for ukraine, but officials are acknowledging that without a path forward for that deal in the house, that their priority is keeping the lights on in the government, their priority is compromise and averting a government shutdown at all costs. they believe this relatively clean short-term bill that would have bipartisan support would likely have support within the administration, and certainly it's seen as a welcome development, one that was relatively unexpected just a few hours ago. >> yeah. lots of surprises today. i was just looking at the calendar. 45 days from now, november 17th. is that another saturday? are we going to repeat this?

no, it's on a friday. either way, let's see what happens over the next 45 days, if indeed it passes in the senate. thank you so much. appreciate it. joining me right now to talk more about all of this is congressman jared moskowitz, a democrat from florida. congressman, good to see you. so how are you feeling here? are you as exhausted as we are, those of us who have been watching all of this? are you hopeful, are you feeling defeated? >> thanks for having me on. no, i'm not tired. this is what we're supposed to be doing. it took longer, we didn't need to get to this point to avert a government shutdown because we could have done this days or weeks ago. this is what the people have sent us to do, so i'm glad we passed this on a bipartisan basis out of the house. i think the senate will pass it and it will get to the president's desk and get signed. the timing of which i don't know because i don't control the

senate. what i do think is we are clearly trying to do what we can to avert a government shutdown and i'm glad the house passed this bill on a bipartisan basis. >> when i spoke with virginia senator warner earlier, he said he was perplexed, he was speaking mostly to the senate saying, you know, the great majority of republicans were on board with ukrainian aid, and he also spoke to a great majority of republicans in the house on board with ukraine aid. is this a great disappointment that that has been removed from this package, even if it means keeping government working for another 45 days? >> no, because i don't believe that the ukraine funding is over. i can't shut the government dawn because we don't get ukraine funding. i've got to fund the government first before i can provide foreign aid to other countries. so this was step one, keeping the government open so that we can then solve the ukraine issue. i support ukraine funding, i

support the white house's request for ukraine funding. this was a vote to keep the government open and i'm not going to shut the government down over foreign aid. >> that sounds like what senator rand paul said. you are still taking the position that over time, maybe within the 45 days, if indeed it passes in the senate, you do believe that somewhere in that 45-day period you will resume conversations about trying to -- you think there's great support for resuming conversations about trying to include ukraine aid in the package? >> i do. and i support the funding and i think we're delaying the inevitable, so i do agree that we could have done it today, and i think we're delaying the inevitable. i will vote for support of ukraine funding. but this kept the government open, gave us the $16 billion of disaster aid, being from florida, in hurricane season, being a former director of emergency management, that disaster aid was critical. fema needed those resources to

help communities, cities, counties, states, that have been affected by hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, fires. this was 90% of what i would have liked to see. so i'm not going to let perfect be the enemy of good. i will fight for the ukraine funding, but i'm happy we're keeping the government open for all those federal employees and americans so we don't crash our economy. >> how much of a surprise did it come to you that senator mitch mcconnell led the bypassing of a procedural vote, saying let's see if this passes in the house. he got his republican caucus reportedly on board that they would vote for the stopgap measure. how surprising is that for you to see that the sequence of events changed abruptly today in just really a matter of hours? >> look, it doesn't surprised me that people talk around capitol hill. so i'm sure the speaker's office and the senate minority office were in constant contact on what they each could get their

members to vote for. look, we're in a divided government, the house is controlled by republicans, the senate by democrats. and so as a democrat who got 90% of what he would have liked to have seen, i voted for it. so did every other democratic except one democratic, and that's because we understand the catastrophic failure it would have been to close the government. remember, we didn't have to get here. this is the same crew that almost took us off the cliff with the debt ceiling, took us right to the brink of defaulting on our debt and took us to the brink of closing the government. we could have been doing this weeks ago to avert this crisis. i'm glad the house passed this on a bipartisan basis. >> among democrats earlier today, among the arguments being made about this newest measure, you weren't given enough time to thoroughly digest it and read through the 72 pages, we saw minority leader hakeem jeffries take advantage of the magic

minutes. was that time in which that led to you being able to pore through all the details, read it thoroughly, talk among your colleagues about likes, dislikes, in the package? what happened in that lapse of time? >> listen, i'm a pretty quick read. it was clear to me that it was an almost perfectly clean cr with disaster aid. as soon as i made the conclusion that it was a clean cr, fulfilling the white house's request on disaster aid, i came out and said i was a yes vote. i think it was a mistake for republicans to try to push this through and give people 20 minutes to read the bill. that's not what they promised to do. they promised to give people time to read bills around here. oftentimes this place passes thousand-page bills with very little time to read them. i'm glad the leader, jeffries, did that, so members around here could read it. but it was very easy for me to

read it, see it was a clean cr with disaster aid, and get on board. that's whey 99.9% of democrats voted for the bill. >> florida congressman, jared moskowitz, thank you for your time. and of course this breaking news continues. we'll hear from both the house speaker and the house minority leader in a matter of minutes. we'll bring it to you live. stay with us.

we continue with this breaking news, just moments ago the house passed a 45-day short-term spending bill to avert a u.s. government shutdown. the bill how goes to the u.s. senate and we have already heard from senate minority leader mitch mcconnell that he and his republican caucus are largely on board with that measure. but, again, the vote has yet to happen in the senate. i'm joined by alex burns, the head of news at politico, and a cnn political analyst. also joining me, errol louis. good to see both of you. and it all happened right here on live television in cnn. alex, all eyes are now on the

u.s. senate. within a matter of an hour and a half, you go from house speaker kevin mccarthy talking about how he was not fearful of losing his job, it was all about i want to keep the u.s. government open, to the next thing you know, there was a -- it looks like he's speaking. house speaker kevin mccarthy right now. >> i had some members in our own conference that wouldn't vote for that. if you have members in your conference that won't let you vote for appropriation bills, doesn't want an omnibus and won't vote for a stopgap measure, so the only answer is to shut down and not pay our troops, i don't want to be a part of that team. i want to be a part of a conservative group that wants to get things done. yes, sir. [ inaudible question ]

>> i'm never giving up on american people, i'm going to focus on america first. i'm going to solve those problems. i believe at the end of the day we'll get them back on board. yes, ma'am. [ inaudible question ] >> look, i think it's very important, if we're worried about ukraine's border, we should worry about america's border, too. i think an opportunity to solve the border along america is now one of the biggest issues in new york. the governor of massachusetts has declared a state of emergency, the governor of new york tells people to go somewhere else, the mayor of new york city says it's destroying, which many in this country believe is one of the greatest cities america has. we have a president that has only been to the border one time in 50 years, but went to cafe milano twice with hunter biden's business partners and got $3 million, and his son got a new porsche. you know what? i will do whatever it takes to

get the president to come down to the border. bring one of hunter's business partners, i don't care. but we need to secure this border. yes, sir. [ inaudible question ] >> it's a daily basis. you watch more nine months, i hope they learn from me that i won't give up and they'll know i'll keep fighting. it's better that we all come together. when we all come together, we're much stronger. think for one moment. when washington, d.c. wanted to decriminalize almost every single crime, we united, the senate said they wouldn't give up. we had 172 democrats vote against it, we had the president say veto it, and he ended up signing it. we heard parents across the country that would get arrested

when they would go to school board meetings simply because they wanted to talk about what was happening, we passed the parents' bill of rights. we ended the pandemic and they said they wouldn't take it up and the president wouldn't sign it. we passed the most conservative bill in the history of congress. we passed an energy bill that would make us energy independent and lower inflation. we were able to get the largest cuts in american history during the debt, we were able to cut more than $2 trillion, get work requirements that the president said would be a red line. and put a provision in that would put a 1% cut across the board if the house and senate doesn't do their job. we got the senate to at least pass those bills in committee, we just had a hard time getting it to the floor. so the one thing i've learned is, get things done, bring others along.

look, i welcome those 21 back in, and we would get a better and more conservative bill if they would simply vote with us. yes, ma'am. [ inaudible question ] >> what were your conversations with leader mcconnell? did you talk to him this morning? >> a dear personal friend of mine, he was great, in the house, he was conveying what was happening. i talked to senator thune many times and i thought senator thune did a tremendous job. i had worked with mcconnell early on in a lot of this. but i didn't get to talk to him today. [ inaudible question ] >> let's understand, there's different ways bills come up. if i bring a bill up under a rule, it only takes 218 to pass. if it's on suspension, it takes republicans and democrats together. we had the majority of the

republicans voting for it. but let's put it in perspective. what happened prior to the bill? the democrats first wanted to adjourn. can you imagine, hours away from shutting down, and they wanted to adjourn? then they came down and all voted to delay it, delay it. then the leader went and took a magic minute to keep talking and delaying it and delaying it. so i think at the end of the day we kept the government open, kept paying our troops, to finish the job we have to get done. yes, sir. [ inaudible question ] >> i think ethics should look at this. this is serious, when you think of how people are treated when they wanted to come in and change the course of what was happening in this building. did he deny he did it when it's on tape? i'm going to have a discussion

with the democratic leader about it. but this should not go without punishment. this is an embarrassment. you're elected to be a member of congress. he pulled a fire alarm, hours before the government being shut down, trying to dictate the government would shut down. what's going through a person's mind like that? but we will find the ability to deal with this. [ inaudible question ] >> yes, i do. what russia has done is wrong, but i believe in whatever we do, we have to define what victory is and what the plan is. i think what the white house needs to do is come down and talk with us where we have a say as well. yes, ma'am. [ inaudible question ]

>> that is training money. i think there's frustration across america that sees this president ignoring america's border, and more concerned about somewhere else. i truly believe that he would focus on america, we would be in a stronger place. yes, ma'am. [ inaudible question ] >> okay, can you tell me what bills in the senate, in the appropriations they passed? has the senate passed any bills? yes or no? have they pass -- has the senate passed any bills? it's not a tough question. yes or no? did the senate pass a bill? do you want me to answer it for you? are you not covering it? i can answer any way i want. you have a right to ask me a question, but i have a right to

answer it. are you embarrassed because the senate hasn't passed any bills, or do you not know the answer to the question? the answer to the question is the senate is a different body. the house has a right to act and have a say in the direction they want. the senate can pass any bill they want. when the senate passes a bill, i'll be surprised, and then we can go to conference. in 45 days, we should get our work all done. yes. [ inaudible question ] >> look, this is interesting. if you had -- you do have a child. i have two kids. i give conner and megan 100 bucks to go to dinner, one spends $100 and the other spends $90. should the other spend all the way up to $100? if we can save money, let's save money together. let's lower whatever we can do. if we can save for the hard-working taxpayers, why can't we have that discussion?

it doesn't mean you have to spend every dollar you want. that's the spending limit. that's the agreement we made. if we find that it's worthy, we could spend over that. but if we find places we can save money, do you know whose money that is? the hard-working taxpayers. yes, next question. yes, sir. >> where are you at personally -- >> right here. >> where are you at personally on aid to ukraine? >> i think what russia has done is horrendous and i have a real concern of what's going to happen long-term, but i don't want to waste any money. the question was asked a year and a half ago about ukraine aid, and i said no blank check. that's what i mean. i want to make sure whatever i vote for that it's held accountable. i think there's accountability problems, but i also want to make sure that we finish the job. thank you very much. i look forward to all your positive questions in the future. >> house speaker kevin mccarthy there in that last note, kind of

justifying why the aid to ukraine was left out of that stopgap measure. you heard him saying, i don't want to waste any money, it's about accountability, knowing how the money that has already been allocated and designated to ukraine is and will be spent. he's also sounding very confident there, after getting the vote through there in the house to pass the stopgap measure. back with me now, alex , i was starting to ask you a question. your reaction to what he had to say. he sounded confident. at the same time, there was a bit of a pat on the back in that he got it done. less of how worried he is about his speakership. >> i think we heard a lot about how worried he is about his speakership. he can say all he wants, he's not concerned, that he has no fear, that he's just trying to get the job done.

but, fred, we wouldn't have had this last-minute -- like almost literally last-minute full cave on a continuing resolution if kevin mccarthy had not been worried about his job all this time. the option of passing a clean resolution to keep the government open while negotiations continue for 30 days or 45 days, that option has been available all along. it didn't just come up this morning. and so when you hear him suddenly pivoting away from describing that step as that would be surrender, that would be giving away leverage, to saying, all i want is to stand up for the american people and that's what i did today, that shows what a last resort this was. and i would say, also, a number of times he was talking about the border, the number of times he was baiting president biden, going after hunter biden in a

d digression from the matter at hand. >> so you did hear he was worried about his job, after he went through the litany, these are the accomplishments, this is how i've gotten things done, brought people on board. he said, i become th-- welcome those 21 back in. he's essentially saying they are going to be back with me, they'll join me, just as many democrats who voted in favor of the stopgap measure. tell me what you're reading between the lines of what he had to say. >> he may welcome the 21 back, but the bigger question is how many of the 21 want to be on his team. he's actually not in control of the situation right now. he's not been in control of the situation for some time. so when he's saying we need to sort of hold together as a party and accomplish big things, that list of big things that he accomplished, almost all of those were the one-party, one-chamber messaging bills that go nowhere in the senate.

and part of the reason why he was painted into the corner that he was in until today, when he finally took the step of working with democrats, is that the senate is controlled by democrats. that is not a one-party, one-chamber solution to funding the government or reaching a deal on spending reductions. it was always going to have to be bipartisan. >> arroll, what did you sfw interpret when he said i want to be a part of that party, to keep the government working. he was dismissing those working with him as not being conservative, but not the conservative that he wants to be associated with. >> that's right. what you hear from kevin mccarthy is something that used to be the rule of the road for conservatives and conservative republicans, which is to say let's back the most conservative package or legislation or candidate that we can feasibly succeed with, that we can get

across the finish line with. these 21 who have been bedevilling the speaker are subscribing to a different theory. their thinking is let's get what we want or blow everything up in the process. and i would not rule out the idea that there could be a lot of turmoil in the next 45 days, and any one of them could advance a motion to vacate and try to have the speaker removed as speaker of the house. a very real possibility at this point. so i think alex is right, the course of events are really being dictated by the democrats and by this conservative faction. mccarthy is dancing as fast as he can, trying to sort of keep all of these plates spinning at the same time, but it could all come crashing down at any moment. one other thing i would say is, it was really stunning to hear all of this talk about the need to deal with the border and to basically abandon ukraine. the lesson of the last 23 years was that if you leave things to

fester, because it's, quote, unquote, not our business or not as important, you leave that to happen in afghanistan, where a guy named osama bin laden declares war on the united states in 1996, nobody pays any attention, until five years later we have 9/11. it is absolutely vital to be engaged overseas. that's what the president has been saying over and over again. the notion that this can just be left alone and we'll sort of work it out later is a really risky gambit that i heard coming from the speaker. >> so, again, no ukraine aid in this stopgap measure, and our jim sciutto actually spoke with the congressman, who had this comment following the vote, and i'm quoting now, this is a victory for putin. early this week a standalone bill funding ukraine lost in the republican caucus, the reagan doctrine is dead among republicans. we have 45 days to clean this

up. so, alex, is that going to be a priority, in the next 45 days -- again, the senate has yet to vote on this and pass it as we just saw, but if indeed that is the case and there are 45 days to work with, is it your feeling that ukraine will be a priority again or find its way in the next package? >> i think that's exactly the right question, will it be a priority. because if the debate is, is there going to be funding for ukraine or is there not going to be funding for ukraine, funding ukraine is the majority position in the country and on capitol hill. the senate minority leader, mitch mcconnell, very outspoken that now is not the time to go wobbly in support for ukraine. of course, the president and the democrats in congress also support funding for ukraine. the bigger risk is that it just falls further and further down the list of priorities for congress to deal with with some urgency. that's part of why it's so

important to sort out in the next couple of weeks, what the house is actually going to look like. if there's going to be a new speaker or if kevin mccarthy is going to remain the speaker, but with a fundamentally different power dynamic where he basically concedes that he's going to need to reach out to democrats a lot more, it's hard to game out what happens to ukraine aid until you know who is actually managing half of the hill. >> yeah, and when ukrainian president zelenskyy was on capitol hill just over a week ago, was at the pentagon, was at the white house, he said, without continued u.s. support, ukraine will lose, point blank -- i think i heard my producer say manu raju might be available. he was on capitol hill, now you're inside. what are you learning, manu? you're so fast. >> reporter: in fact, i was just in that press conference with the speaker of the house who is touting this bill that was passed, even though he did rely

on a significant amount of democratic support, just one democrat voted against it. 90 republicans voted against it, more than half of kevin mccarthy's republican conference did support it. that was something that all along he had been warned against, relying on democratic votes to keep the government open. those hard liners had said if he were to do that, that could be the end of his speakership. the question now is, will they actually carry that out? i had a chance to ask the speaker the question about the votes. if there is a vote to push him out, does he expect that he would actually rely on democratic votes, might need the support of democrats to keep him in the speakership. that is something that has been discussed privately. he did not answer that directly, but did take aim at matt gaetz, who was the ringleader and essentially said, quote, bring it, if they want to try to force a vote to push him out, he said he is ready for that fight. he said he needed to be the,

quote, adult in the room in trying to get this spending bill through the house, avoid a government shutdown, even if it did mean relying on democratic votes. so the speaker is making very clear that he is ready for a fight. if this were to play out, it's unclear the timing of all of this. but essentially all democrats, if they decided to kick him out, with five republicans, that could be enough to vacate the speakership. there would be nobody in charge until they would elect a new speaker. that would leave the house in a chaotic and unprecedented situation, something that the speaker believes, if it happens, he could still grind it out, fight it out as he did back in january when he was elected the first time, after 15 ballots. he said, i went 15 ballots in january. he's ready to fight again. so watch to see if that plays out as the anger on the right continues to build. i had a chance to talk to a number of members who have threatened the speaker, threatened to push him out. they're not ready to say they're going to vote against him quite

yet. we'll see if and when this comes to pass, if and when matt gaetz moves forward. but gaetz has been threatening this for some time. the expectation is that he will move ahead and the question will be, what will the votes be and how will the speaker respond if and when it does come to pass. >> my god, that's fascinating. a quick follow-up, manu, if that were, indeed, a scenario, that's not something that's going to play out within that 45-day period, would it? >> reporter: it could. as soon as you offer the motion to kick him out of the speakership, it takes two legislative days for it to come up. it could happen within, potentially, 48 hours of congress being in session. the house just closed its doors and they're not expected to be in tomorrow. this is not something that would happen until next week at the earliest. that's one thing we'll have to watch for. i want to point out across the capitol, senate democrats are trying to decide exactly how to deal with this bill that just passed the house. >> house minority leader hakeem

jeffries is speaking right now. >> incredibly important programs like public education, providing food to women, infants and children, ensuring that social security recipients could address any interruptions with the checks that they need, we went from devastating cuts that would have impacted the health, the safety and the economic well-being of the american people in 24 hours, to a spending agreement that meets the needs of the american people across the board. entirely consistent with what democrats have said from the very beginning is the only path forward, a bipartisan spending agreement that keeps government open, avoids a catastrophic

government shutdown, and meets the needs of the american people in every possible way. we said from the beginning that we were going to protect social security, protect medicare, protect medicaid, protect public education, protect public safety, protect those individuals who secure us all across the land, protect veterans, protect our ability to continue to combat the climate crisis, protect the economy, and protect the ability of our government to provide for the health, the safety, and the economic well-being of the american people. and that is what the spending agreement that democrats overwhelmingly supported on the floor of the house of

representatives accomplished today. we're on a path to avoid a catastrophic extreme maga republican shutdown, and to continue to meet the needs of the american people. the american people have won, the extreme maga republicans have lost. it was a victory for the american people and a complete and total surrender by right wing extremists who, throughout the year, have tried to hijack the congress. moving forward, we will continue to work in a bipartisan way to discuss a year-end spending agreement, consistent with our values, meeting the needs of the american people, solving problems on their behalf, and putting people over politics.

that is what the spending agreement that passed the house floor today has accomplished, and moving forward that will be our guiding principle in getting things done for the american people. it's now my honor to yield to katherine clark, the distinguished house democratic whip. >> thank you so much, mr. leader, for those comments, and for leading our caucus and putting the american people's voice into this process, and, of course, for your hour today -- >> you were listening to hakeem jeffries there, who classified this juncture as the american people winning and the extreme republicans losing in the passage of this stopgap measure. manu raju back with us now. manu, so very succinct there from jeffries, that the

priorities, he says, of saving social security, medicare, medicaid, public equity, safety, all of that was preserved in this measure. >> reporter: yeah, look, this measure was a retreat from the republican position. there's no question about it. the position that the speaker wanted the house to assert, which failed in a stopgap measure yesterday, would have cut federal spending pretty significantly among domestic programs. it would have taken a significant hit under his plan. it also have would included new border security measures. because of those cuts, democrats voted against it in unison yesterday. and also 21 republicans voted against it yesterday, which means it did not have the votes to move ahead. the speaker had to essentially back off of those demands and this proposal that just passed the house extends current funding levels. that is something that conservatives in the conference were railing against, wanted to fight against, to cut deeper spending.

so he had to back off of that. it did include disaster relief, the white house had pushed for $16 billion to deal with national disasters. the speaker did not put in funding for ukraine in this measure, and that is going to be a huge fight, with enormous global implications in the weeks ahead. just moments ago when the speaker talked, he did not indicate how he would deal with the issue of ukraine funding, suggesting, perhaps, it needed to be tied to border security money as well, but not giving any clear sense of when this could happen, even as he professed support for the ukrainian cause, how congress would deal with this significant issue, even though there is overwhelming support for funding ukraine. even though the democrats didn't get everything they wanted, at the end of the day, it was essentially a clean extension, and the government likely will stay open once the senate acts,

potentially within the next few hours, to keep the government open for the next 45 days. >> i would love to get your point of views on what we just heard from hakeem jeffries. rakeem jeffries, the minority leader, putting it clear that he saw this as a victory to vote for the passage of this house measure. still, it's on its way to the senate. unclear whether it will pass. the conventional wisdom is it looks like all systems are go for that. but the vote has to actually happen. what are your thoughts on the confidence level that we're getting, both from the house minority leader and the house speaker, kevin mccarthy as well? >> look, for the minority leader, hakeem jeffries, this is a huge win and a very big day. he kept his entire conference together except for one single vote. he basically dictated the survival of this government for another few days or weeks, at

least. he avoided the shutdown. he personally made that happen, in part, by doing a procedural equivalent of a filibuster, talking for nearly an hour to give his conference members a chance both to strategize, but also to read the bill. they prevented what had been, as recently as 48 hours ago, a 30% cut to some really important programs. so on values, on strategy, on clout and on power, for somebody who is not in the majority, he really kind of maximized his influence, and that's what skill and savvy will do for you. this remaining question about ukraine, of course, is going to be a real showdown at some point in the future. but the essentials, the basics, making sure that millions of federal workers don't suddenly have their lives turned upside down, is a real win for the democrats. >> alex, you're nodding in agreement. what are your thoughts? >> look, i do agree with

everything, and on top of the reasonably declaring victory, there was some salt in the wound there. it wasn't just saying democrats held the line and the american people won, he said it was complete and total surrender for what happened on the republican side. i think we're going to see in the next couple of days how much there has been a complete and total surrender. if kevin mccarthy passes this with mostly democratic support and there are no consequences from the far right, i think it will be a fair statement to say that the far right has surrendered. we don't know whether that's going to happen. we do know the republican leadership surrendered in this staring contest and that's a very legitimate win for the democratic party. fred, i think one of the big questions that's hanging over the hill right now is, if there is an effort to boot out mccarthy on the far right, would any democrats vote to keep him as speaker, because it would take five republicans to kick him out if all the democrats

i don't know if this is what leader jeffries had in mind. you can read articulating what it would take for democrats to interact with kevin mccarthy in a constructive way going forward, which is that emphasis on we're going to go back to bipartisan talks about spending, right. that i don't think there's a whole lot of appetite among the democrats i talked to to bail out kevin mccarthiless this they get something really good in return. >> that was a good catch. you're right. hakeem jeffries underscoring we're going to continue to work in a bipartisan way. continuing on a path to avoid extreme republican shutdown. yeah, it is a read between the lines on that. it's also perhaps a bit of a compliment and boost of support to the house speaker that while you have your detractors and,

you know, kevin mccarthy talked about the 21, he thinks they'll eventually -- he'll be in a position of welcoming them back in, perhaps, alex, that was hakeem jeffries also saying since you got me reading between the lines now, you know, saying that, okay, we can accomplish things as long as we continue to work together. >> there has been -- today was a weird example of -- hard to say working together when it was basically a last-minute cave that sort of taking the one option you have left. but you know, you talk to folks on the hill, and particularly people on the center left, center right, there's this incredible frustration that in a chamber that's this evenly divided and with the senate and the white house held by democrats, it's extremely obvious -- it doesn't take a particularly sophisticated political mind to see that if you're going to get anything of scale done, it need to be done on a bipartisan basis. up to this point, the approach that speaker mccarthy and most

republicans have taken is not to do that, not to work on a bipartisan basis, but to try to find these -- what they see as leverage points, the debt limit vote, the vote to continue funding the government, and try to sort of just strong-arm democrats in the white house into caving. and we saw that approach isn't working. >> yeah. i mean, it's not over, right, senate still has to vote. to that point, i guess there was -- it seemed like a minority did exert some pressure, or you know, seemed to feel emboldened that actually they can twist some arms, that they can make things happen even though they're the minority. it almost worked. at least prior to the house vote today. >> sure. look, we're not at the end of this. you know, they really could just, as manu suggested, could come back in a few days with a motion to vacate and could turn the whole house of representatives and u.s. government upside down all over

again just as they did at the start of his speakership. i wouldn't rule that out at all. there's also going to be the showdown over ukraine aid. that's going to be a big fight, a big national fight. there's there question about whether or not they're going to sort of frame the next round of elections, both for congress and, frankly, for the white house, around questions of border security and what goes on there. so they've got a lot. our system of government does allow a concerted, determined minority to exert quite a lot of influence. it didn't work with them today, but i wouldn't count them out by any means. >> do you see that work is beginning already? even though there is yet to be a senate vote, the work is beginning already on securing those other things in the next package because 45 days is going to come and go just like that. >> oh, yeah, sure. we're going to be sitting around talking probably the weekend before thanksgiving -- >> no because the 17th is on a friday. we're not doing this again on a

saturday. >> the question will there be a shutdown during or just before or just after thanksgiving, you know. and it's -- it's a heck of a way to govern. let's keep in mind, speaker mccarthy shook hands with the president of the united states in may. they had a deal, and the fact that that deal is now either being reneged on or some think the speaker should alter it in some fundamental way, i think that's what got so many members including republicans in the house so very, very upset. it's hard enough to govern under the best of circumstances, but if you're going to shake hands and then try and alter the deal somewhere down the road, i think everybody kind of turns on you. and that really explains a lot of what we saw today, as well. >> that can be very bruising your credibility. let's go to the white house. alex, errol, thank you so much. appreciate you sticking around, giving me all of your insight. we have more from the white house. any kind of reaction coming from

the white house? any thoughts on what the road ahead might potentially look like? >> reporter: it remains, fred, to be seen exactly when the senate is expected to vote on that short-term spending bill that passed the house. we do know according to our own reporting that the white house would likely support that compromise bill and sees it as a win because it doesn't include the steep cuts to government programs, up to 30% across the board, that were included in previous versions. it does offer disaster relief funding, an authorization for the faa. and they do believe that speaker mccarthy will make good on a promise to support ukraine through new funding in some future measure going forward. now to that end, fred, we're also learning that top pentagon officials warned lawmakers in a letter yesterday and in conversations over the last few days that funds for ukraine were running out, and there would be disruptions on the battlefield and in the country's readiness to fight against russia if they

did not include new funding in this short-term bill. of course it is not included, so we expect some more dire warnings on that front. >> all right. thank you so much. thanks to everybody for joining us today from capitol hill, our guests, et cetera. it was quite the whirlwind. a lot going on today. we're going to continue our cottage on cnn. thank you so much for joining me. "newsroom" now with jim acosta.

c'mon, we're right there. c'mon baby.

it's the only we need. go, go, go, go! ah! touchdown baby! -touchdown! are your neighbors watching the same game? yeah, my 5g home internet delays the game a bit. but you get used to it. try these. they're noise cancelling earmuffs. i stole them from an airport. it's always something with you, man. great! solid! -greek salad? exactly! don't delay the game with verizon or t-mobile 5g home internet. catch it on the xfinity 10g network.