Arizona Republican Rep. Andy Biggs on Monday fumed over reports that Washington was working with Ukraine on a 10-year aid plan, even after Congress approved a $61 billion aid package.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky this week revealed that his government was working on a "bilateral security agreement" that would fix "specific levels of support for this year and for the next ten years."

"I didn't know that we were trying to annex Ukraine as a 51st state," he said on the "John Solomon Reports" podcast. 

"I mean, this is how absurd this has become."

Biggs went on to point out that barely 40% of the cash we've spent on Ukraine has gone directly to their military and defensive needs. The rest, he noted, goes to Ukrainian pensions, farm subsidies, government operations, and a significant portion "is just gone to the wind." This is probably why the White House and the Democrats don't want to approve an audit of where all the Ukraine money went. People would be outraged.

I would take exception with Biggs on one point, however. This isn't even remotely the same as adopting Ukraine as our 51st state. None of our states get this sort of sweetheart deal, or at least not unless they deliver a boatload of votes for the Democrats. The situation with Ukraine has long since moved past the point of foreign military aid and into the territory of foreign welfare. 

While we're on the subject, where does Zelensky find his definition of a "bilateral security agreement?" We have such agreements with a number of allies, and while America is always the more generous partner, both sides get something out of the bargain. This can come in the form of access to foreign ports or military bases, favorable trade agreements, or intelligence sharing. 

We know what Ukraine would be getting out of such an agreement. They would get cash by the truckload. But what does the United States get in return other than the honor of writing them checks? The country has largely been gutted and they don't produce much of anything anymore. And please spare me any talk of how Ukraine is fighting to stop Russia so we won't have to fight them across all of Europe. Putin is vicious and arguably evil, but he's not stupid. He's not going to march into the interior of our European NATO allies after bleeding his own forces off fighting Ukraine for years. And if he's crazy enough to use his nukes, there's not a lot we can do about that other than nuke Russia into a pool of smoking glass in return. 

Assuming Zelensky isn't just hallucinating all of this, you can probably guess what the worst part of any such ten-year security agreement that the Biden administration and the Democrats may try to craft would be. It would be a foreign policy agreement crafted by the Biden administration and a narrow Democratic majority in the Senate only months before an election. There is no guarantee (nor should there be) and a potentially different incoming presidential administration and new majorities in both chambers would support such an arrangement. But they would like to lock the country into such a bank-breaking deal until long after the next president, no matter their party, leaves office. This should be completely intolerable to all concerned. I feel bad for the Ukrainian people like almost everyone does. They didn't start this war and they didn't ask for all of the death and destruction that has been visited upon them. But it currently appears as if Volodymyr Zelenski is running one of the greatest con jobs of all time. We need a great deal more checks and balances applied to this relationship and the mountains of foreign aid heading to Kyiv.