Connect with us

Congress

Democrats make a right turn on immigration

Published

on

A rightward national shift on border-related concerns helped give Republicans control of the White House and Senate — and the consequences are playing out on Capitol Hill this week with Democrats showing a new willingness to follow the GOP’s lead on illegal immigration.

It’s an unmistakable sign that some in the Democratic ranks are moving in step with the electorate, abandoning their party’s old pieties on those issues and embracing tough new enforcement measures.

Forty-eight House Democrats voted Tuesday to advance an illegal immigration crackdown known as the Laken Riley Act, a bill named for a Georgia nursing student murdered last year by an undocumented immigrant. That’s up from the 37 Democrats who backed the bill last March.

The Senate is set to take up the bill Friday, and already three Democrats, including Sens. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Gary Peters of Michigan, are planning to advance it — raising the likelihood that it will be able to vault a filibuster and eventually be signed into law by President-elect Donald Trump.

Republican leaders are eager to put Democrats on their heels, forcing them to quickly choose whether it’s a moment to resist or side with the GOP. This week’s votes will offer early clues on how both sides will chart their path forward on Trump’s top priority.

“We need to take a different approach with immigration,” said Rep. Nikki Budzinski (D-Ill.), who voted for the bill Tuesday. “What shouldn’t be lost is that we have to fix this system and do more than just one piece of this.”

Democrats previously denigrated measures like the Laken Riley Act, which would require the detention of any undocumented immigrant charged with theft or burglary, as “messaging bills” meant to stir up political passions, not to solve complex policy problems.

Ahead of the election, some Democrats raised alarms about how voters were repulsed by a seemingly out-of-control southern border. And now, with more ascribing the party’s setbacks to those issues, some lawmakers said they felt doubly compelled to back the GOP-led legislation.

“What happened in South Texas tells you a lot,” said Trump-district Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), referring to massive GOP gains on the presidential ticket in areas along the Rio Grande. “We don’t want the folks to shift downballot, too.”

Fetterman and Peters signaled they will vote for the measure when it’s taken up by the Senate on Friday; Peters, a former national campaign committee chair, is up for reelection next year, while Fetterman is up in 2028 and hasn’t ruled out a presidential bid. Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) is also expected to vote to advance the bill, according to a person familiar with his plans.

Newly elected Sens. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) and Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) both voted for the bill last year when they were House members. If they vote the same way this time, the measure would only need three more Democratic votes to break a filibuster.

Most of the House Democrats who broke ranks to vote for the legislation Tuesday were purple-district members and newly elected swing district lawmakers like Reps. George Whitesides and Dave Min — who were among seven Californians backing the bill. But safe-seat lawmakers backed the legislation, too — such as Reps. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.) and Terri Sewell (D-Ala.).

Even Democrats who remained opposed have undergone their own subtle rhetorical shift. Few in the party openly disputed a need to crack down on border-related crime or to enforce immigration laws. Instead, they cited process-related issues like concerns the bill could lead to more immigration detentions or would sweep up DACA recipients.

“I think violence in this country is unacceptable no matter who commits any act of violence, and we also have to have a strong foundation for the rule of law,” said purple-district Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.), who voted against the bill Tuesday.

Republicans are using the Laken Riley bill to make clear their intent to prioritize immigration as Trump prepares his return to Washington. They also view it as an early opportunity to put Democrats on record as they come to terms with voters’ apparent rejection of their party’s approach to immigration.

“People are going to have to make a decision, and, you know, it’s now a bipartisan bill,” said Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyoming) after Fetterman voiced support on Monday. “You have a couple of Democrats who have now just joined the Senate, who were members of the House and voted for it, Gallego and Slotkin. So we would hope that they would vote for it as well. And we’re going to see what the Georgia senators do, too. This happened in Georgia.”

Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) declined to say Tuesday how he would vote.

The GOP still faces momentous challenges as it tries to pass the remainder of its border policy agenda. For much of it, they are counting on using the budget reconciliation process, which would not require Democratic help.

As Republicans hash out their overall reconciliation strategy — including whether to try and pass a smaller border-focused bill first — Trump will move quickly to crack down on immigration in the days after he takes office, rolling out executive actions, moving to undo Biden administration policies and beginning the process of deporting hundreds of thousands of people.

Legal setbacks are inevitable, even as his team works to craft executive orders that can withstand court challenges, and Trump will be looking to Congress for additional funding and resources to build upon his agenda.

“We’re all belts and suspenders,” said Michael Hough, director of federal relations at NumbersUSA, an immigration restrictionist group. “Executive actions are great, because it’s the immediate fix, immediate cure, but it’s not a permanent one. We still want to see legislative changes go through.”

But the rules governing reconciliation likely preclude the inclusion of sweeping immigration restrictions. Enacting law, in other words, will require Democrats’ participation.

“I think immigration policy is going to be impossible for them in reconciliation,” said Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas). “We found that out when we had the majority, and they are counting on incoming President Trump and his executive orders, but they frankly need us.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Congress

Kiley switches parties, loses committees

Published

on

Rep. Kevin Kiley, the former Republican who recently registered as an Independent, said in an interview Wednesday he plans to caucus with the House GOP and will seek to regain his committee assignments.

The California lawmaker was formally removed from his panels Wednesday after giving official notice he was switching parties to serve as an Independent and run in a new district after his state redrew congressional maps.

The House GOP Steering Committee will need to approve Kiley’s effort to take back his seats on Education and the Workforce, Transportation and Infrastructure and Judiciary. Kiley told reporters this was “completely expected” and that he looked “forward to being reappointed as an Independent.”

Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Congress

Tim Scott to run for reelection to the Senate

Published

on

Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) will run for reelection in 2028, his campaign told Blue Light News on Wednesday, reversing a promise to serve just two full terms in the chamber.

Appointed by then-Gov. Nikki Haley to serve out the last two years of outgoing Sen. Jim DeMint’s Senate term in 2012, Scott had long said that 2022 would mark his final bid for the Senate.

He easily won reelection that year, besting Democratic state lawmaker Krystle Matthews by more than 25 percentage points. Scott then ran for president but abandoned his short-lived bid for the White House before the Iowa caucuses.

He was briefly considered to serve as now-President Donald Trump’s running mate and has since emerged as a key White House ally in the Senate.

“And I’ll say without any question that as I think about my own reelection in 2028, I think about all the lessons I’ve learned on the campaign trail for all these other candidates, and frankly, even in South Carolina,” Scott told the Charleston, South Carolina-based Post and Courier, which was first to report his reelection plans.

Continue Reading

Congress

Quick vote on Mullin’s DHS nomination hangs on classified briefing

Published

on

Hopes for a quick vote on Sen. Markwayne Mullin’s nomination as Homeland Security secretary hang on questions about secretive travel the Oklahoma Republican undertook as a House member a decade ago that are now being examined by his Senate colleagues.

Mullin was questioned extensively about the matter Wednesday by Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Gary Peters (D-Mich.), the chair and ranking member, respectively, of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Testifying under oath Wednesday, Mullin said he participated in what he described as “official travel” and a “classified trip” as part of a “special program inside the House” that went from 2015 to 2016. He said he was not a member of the House Intelligence Committee at the time and refused to answer further questions outside of a classified setting.

The attention on the matter came after Peters raised questions about Mullin’s past claims suggesting he had traveled to war zones and had first-hand exposure to combat environments despite his lack of a military background.

After the hearing adjourned Wednesday afternoon, Mullin joined Paul, Peters and other members of the committee in the Senate’s classified briefing facility.

“I’m one of these people who think that we silo off too much information from the public,” Paul told reporters after the hearing. “When we’re going to war, they tell eight people, it’s like, ‘Oh, we’ve notified Congress.’ So I don’t think that is adequate.”

“It makes people curious when you say, I’m doing secret missions for somebody, but I won’t tell you who, and only four people in the world know about those,” Paul added.

Mullin said only four people were “read into” the program in question and declined to say publicly what agencies or committees were involved.

“It’s a little difficult for us to go ask about a program that has no name and we have nobody that we know to talk to about it,” Peters said before Mullin agreed to the classified meeting. “So I don’t know how we would begin doing this without your cooperation.”

The questions about the shadowy travel erupted after Mullin’s nomination suddenly turned rocky after Paul questioned his temperament and fitness for office based on his past comments and behavior.

Paul later confirmed he would oppose Mullin’s nomination but said he still intended to hold a committee vote Thursday. To get through the panel with Paul opposed, Mullin will need the support of at least one Democrat.

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) has suggested he is inclined to support Mullin but declined to confirm Wednesday he would vote for him. Fetterman was among the senators spotted entering the classified meeting following the hearing.

“I’m willing to hold the vote tomorrow, but you brought this up that you were on a super secret mission,” Paul told Mullin at the hearing.

“No, I did not say super secret,” Mullin responded. “I said it was classified.”

Continue Reading

Trending