As the fall elections approach, Republicans’ infusion of large amounts of money into immigration enforcement comes with potentially dangerous political costs.
ICE deployment could extend to more than 40 states
ICE plans to send about 330 people to cities in more than 40 states, including Puerto Rico. The initiative aims to increase immigration enforcement in both large cities and small towns.
Democrats don’t have much influence in Washington these days — until they don’t.
A small but important political window briefly opened this week as Senate Republicans worked to pass a nearly $70 billion funding bill for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Security. The huge influx of cash over the years was finally approved in the early morning hours of Friday, June 5, on a mostly party-line vote.
But it comes at a price. To greenlight the bill with a simple majority, Republicans were forced to endure a litany of tough votes offered by Democrats (and some within their own party).
Early in the morning, all kinds of measures were on the table, including a formal ban on the Justice Department’s so-called “anti-weaponization” fund, a complete elimination of funding for the White House banquet hall, and strengthening housing affordability for Americans. It was all part of a volatile but consequential legislative process that senators called “Vote-a-Rama.”
The late-night Senate action underscored what issues Democrats believe could be politically salient in the upcoming midterm elections, and how vulnerable Republicans feel the need to break away from the party.
“The Republican agenda is now written in black and white: slush funds for Trump, tax avoidance for Trump, banquet halls for Trump, and private militias for Trump,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement. “For hard-working Americans? Nothing.”
The bill’s passage also solidified Republicans’ resolve to support immigration enforcement at all costs, even as ICE has come under increased scrutiny during the second Trump era.
“Why are we here? Through the normal spending process, Democrats will not give a dime to Border Patrol or ICE,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). “We had reforms, we had agreements, but it didn’t work.”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-South Dakota) largely maintained the conference’s unity against a barrage of attacks from Democrats.
As voting dragged on until 5 a.m., Republican frustration only grew.
“We know we’re here to fund ICE and Border Patrol, so why do we keep introducing amendment after amendment?” said Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio). “Let’s get on with the job at hand and put an end to this travesty.”
Subscribe to “About Politics”: Stay ahead of the midterm elections with our daily politics newsletter.
Housing measures have been defeated
With cost of living concerns a top concern for voters through November, Democrats proposed two housing affordability measures to attach to the ICE bill.
One came from New Hampshire Sen. Maggie Hassan, who proposed authorizing funding to support the construction of 7 million new homes through the Federal Housing Investment Partnership Program.
“The construction of these homes will address the housing shortage and make housing more affordable,” she said.
The bill failed on a party-line vote. Another amendment by Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island was similar. He said his plan would divert ICE and Border Patrol funding to invest in more affordable housing.
But Congress isn’t completely ignoring rising home prices. For months, the Senate has been pushing the House to pass a sweeping bipartisan housing reform bill called the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act. Among other things, the bill would prohibit some Wall Street landlords from purchasing more existing single-family homes.
“We want homes for people, not businesses,” President Trump said in his last State of the Union address in February.
But experts say the policy won’t affect a wide range of Americans because large institutional investors own less than 1% of single-family homes.
Department of Justice Fund Drama
The biggest hurdle to getting the ICE bill passed overnight was the Justice Department’s much-planned $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told lawmakers this week that the highly scrutinized proposal could no longer move forward, but Democrats and some Republicans still wanted to codify the pledge into law.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina) said on the same day that “there are enough Republicans who have made it clear that there is concern here.”
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-Louisiana) worked late into the morning to come up with a politically viable way to introduce an amendment that would effectively eliminate the fund. He ultimately proposed a measure to redirect some of the payments to law enforcement officers who protected the Capitol on Jan. 6, but the effort ultimately failed without reaching the 60-vote threshold.
But he was able to get five other senators on his side of the aisle to vote with him.
Cassidy’s amendment wasn’t the only one that further highlighted Republican concerns about the Justice Department fund. Eight Republicans voted in favor of a separate bill from Sen. Chris Coons (Delaware) that would ban all funding to the mob that assaulted police officers on January 6th.
I couldn’t pass that either.
Contributed by: Reuters
Zachary Schermele is a Congressional reporter for USA TODAY. You can email us at zschermele@usatoday.com. Follow him at @ZachSchermele on X and @zachschermele.bsky.social on Bluesky..
