Congress

Rand Paul is facing an ICE funding dilemma

Published

5 months ago

April 9, 2026

Just a few months ago, President Donald Trump denounced Rand Paul as a “sick wacko” who opposes “everything.” Now the Kentucky senator is a key gatekeeper for one of the president’s biggest priorities.

As chair of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Paul faces a stark choice as his fellow Republicans race to pass a party-line immigration enforcement bill by Trump’s June 1 deadline. At the same time, he’s confronting his own political future.

Paul’s colleagues sidelined him last year when he refused to give as big a cash infusion for border security as the White House wanted. Now he must decide whether to go along as GOP leaders discuss potentially funding parts of DHS for as long as a decade.

It would come as little surprise if Paul raised objections. Known in Washington as a perennial leadership gadfly, he’s repeatedly broken with Trump since January 2025 on everything from tariffs to the ongoing Iran war and last year’s deficit-busting megabill, where he was one of three Senate Republicans who voted no.

Paul is also eyeing a possible presidential run in 2028 as he tries to get the GOP to look past Trump’s dramatic expansion of federal power and illustrate there is still room for libertarian-leaning, small government Republicans like him.

Spokespeople for Paul and the committee he chairs did not respond to a request for an interview. They also did not respond to a question on whether they have gotten any guidance yet on what the Kentucky Republican’s role will be in the immigration enforcement funding push.

Under the filibuster-skirting budget reconciliation process GOP leaders are hoping to employ, Paul’s committee is expected to be asked to hand over legislative language as part of a bill that will deliver tens of billions of dollars to ICE and parts of Customs and Border Protection. Paul has criticized those agencies at times, suggesting they should not get a blank check as they face questions about their use of force.

“This isn’t because I want no ICE,” Paul told reporters earlier this year. “I want people to trust ICE. I want people to trust the immigration authorities and I think they do hard work.”

A senior White House official granted anonymity to speak candidly downplayed any concerns about Paul in the upcoming reconciliation bill, noting he recently backed the administration’s plans for a major White House renovation. The official also questioned whether Paul, who has repeatedly voted to advance a House-passed bill that includes immigration enforcement money, would want to be against DHS funding.

“Rand voted for the ballroom, right?” the official said, referring to Paul’s ex-officio vote on a D.C. planning board.

His colleagues are not as convinced.

“Rand generally votes no,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said in an interview.

Paul’s fellow Republicans likely wouldn’t have voluntarily picked the maverick senator to shape an immigration enforcement bill, but he secured the gavel on the Homeland Security panel last year by dint of seniority.

After spending years warning against an overreaching federal government, Paul raised pointed concerns about some of the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement tactics after federal agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis in January. He was also the only Republican to oppose Markwayne Mullin’s nomination as Homeland Security secretary, arguing in part he did not have the temperament to run the department.

During a recent CBS News interview, Paul argued more broadly that Congress wasn’t doing enough to check the administration and put the odds at “50-50” that he makes another run for the White House in 2028.

“I’m not going to do it just to do it,” Paul said. “It would be … because we need to have a free-market wing, we need to have a free-trade wing of the party who is not eager for war.”

Paul previously ran for president in 2016 but dropped out shortly after the Iowa caucuses. A bill currently moving through the Kentucky state legislature would allow Paul to run simultaneously for president and reelection to the Senate in 2028 — something he unsuccessfully pursued ahead of his 2016 run.

Trump, for his part, has repeatedly criticized Paul as a frequent roadblock in public remarks and on his Truth Social account — including the November “sick wacko” reference. He took notice this month when Paul agreed to green-light the White House ballroom in a vote of the National Capital Planning Commission. (Paul’s chief of staff attended the meeting and cast the vote on his behalf.)

“I am pleased to announce that even Board Member Senator Rand Paul, known as an extraordinarily difficult vote, voted a strong YES,” Trump said in a Truth Social post.

But it was Paul’s spending-hawk tendencies that got him sidelined by the White House and his GOP colleagues last year as they sought to wrap up the party’s tax-cuts-focused megabill. Senate Budget Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), in coordination with party leaders, effectively discarded Paul’s border security proposal and inserted his own language into the bill.

Paul and Graham had released substantially different proposals for funding under the Homeland Security panel’s jurisdiction. Paul proposed $6.5 billion for building the border wall, while Graham pitched $46.5 billion. Graham proposed $45 billion for ICE detention facilities, roughly twice what Paul proposed.

Graham at the time dismissed Paul’s pitch for a lower funding level as “shallow,” and members of the Homeland Security panel said Paul hadn’t consulted with them.

Paul has said little about how he is thinking about the upcoming GOP immigration enforcement push. He has separately warned that he does not support including funding for the Iran war in a reconciliation bill.

If the bill stays narrowly focused, Paul could have less sway as the bill is tightly negotiated by House and Senate Republican leaders, as well as the White House. The Judiciary Committee, not the committee Paul chairs, drafted a significant swath of the immigration language in last year’s megabill.

GOP colleagues aren’t vowing yet that they will sidestep him as they scramble to meet Trump’s deadline. But they are making clear that the DHS provisions will ultimately be decided by what can get the votes needed to clear the Senate — even if that does not comport with what the libertarian-leaning Kentuckian wants.

A GOP senator granted anonymity to speak candidly predicted Paul would have “influence” as the committee chair, but not a final say.

“Ultimately what it’ll come down to is where there’s 51 votes,” the senator added.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune added in an interview that Paul and other committee chairs tasked with writing the bill would have “input.”

Eli Stokols contributed to this report.

Congress

Convention puts GOP’s reality on display: Midterm policy agenda is skimpy

Published

23 hours ago

September 12, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

DALLAS — Republicans used their midterm convention this week to ask voters to preserve their congressional majorities and let them “finish the job.”

But with few consensus legislative goals, it’s far from clear what job they want to finish.

The two-day convention here centered on painting Democrats as an increasingly socialist party that American voters cannot trust with power while highlighting the GOP’s one major victory on Capitol Hill under President Donald Trump’s second term: the year-old tax-cut package known as the “big, beautiful bill.”

In contrast, there was little talk from the podium of what Republicans might seek to pass with a continued trifecta, and members interviewed on the sidelines shared differing visions of what specific legislation the GOP should pursue in the last two years of Trump’s presidency.

The one concrete proposal on offer — Trump’s promise Wednesday of a $5,000 “dividend” for every American adult — blindsided GOP congressional leaders and generated immediate internal dissension.

Asked about his party’s legislative plans, Rep. Chuck Fleischmann of Tennessee said Republicans would “certainly continue the agenda that we’ve done and that we fulfill to the American people.”

“Accentuate all the positives, minimize all the negatives,” said Rep. Dan Meuser of Pennsylvania, responding to the same question. He added he would like to see “more domestic energy production” and tackling fraud in government programs.

Several others said they want to build on last year’s GOP megabill, pursuing more tax cuts and, echoing Meuser, eliminating wasteful spending in government. Some said they hoped to pursue new health care and immigration policies.

“We’ll continue to work with President Trump, making sure the border stays secure,” Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan of Ohio said in an interview. “I think we can do more on the tax code, dealing with keeping taxes low for families. Certainly … things cost too much for families. We understand it now.”

Specifics, however, were scarce.

Fleischmann said Republicans have “a good roadmap in place,” but when pressed on what that roadmap entails, he resorted to broad strokes — “to make sure that America stays strong, that defense gets funded, that we make sure that we fulfill our proper domestic obligations.”

Rather than rally around Trump’s promise of $5,000 checks if Republicans are returned to power in Congress, many GOP members — caught by surprise — said they needed more information about the proposal or simply declined to comment. Once mentioned by the president, the proposal was barely mentioned again on the convention stage.

Trump said in a CBS News interview Thursday that he believed he might not need Congress to authorize the dividend checks — a claim some Republicans quickly pushed back on.

The reality is, the narrow House and Senate majorities the GOP now holds have been barely capable of legislating as it is. And while leaders in both chambers play up the possibility of expanding those majorities in November, that would require overcoming historical precedent and many Republicans’ private expectations they will be lucky to hold on to any majority at all.

Both chambers return Monday for what could be a brief pre-election session, with little expectation that serious legislating will get done. House Republicans have sent several partisan bills to the Senate, but they are being blocked by Democratic filibusters. Plans for a new budget reconciliation bill that could skirt Democratic opposition has stalled, meanwhile, due to internal GOP divides.

The lack of action in the Senate has fueled anger from Trump and his loyalists in Congress and in the GOP voter base — much of it trained on Senate Majority Leader John Thune, who has repeatedly said he simply does not have the votes to eliminate the filibuster and enact the stalled bills.

That has not appeased angry conservatives — Thune was booed at the convention Wednesday — and a continued GOP trifecta would almost certainly continue to be marked by interchamber tensions — even with turnover in the party ranks.

“Given the current dynamic, we have got to have a serious come-to-Jesus conversation with Majority Leader Thune,” Rep. Chip Roy of Texas said at the convention, demanding the Senate “tweak the filibuster rules” and “call the question” on key bills.

Even on an issue where there is general agreement among Republicans that something should be done — such as immigration — internal disagreements have kept the party from acting.

Jordan, for instance, said he would like to codify tough border security policies backed by Trump. But some more moderate Republicans are hoping for a more comprehensive bill that also addresses legal immigration programs, such as those allowing for guest agricultural workers and high-skilled labor.

Meuser is among those wanting a broader bill — one, he said, that is “not amnesty, but a truly comprehensive, smart plan for illegal immigration.”

Speaker Mike Johnson did not mention immigration legislation or any other specific agenda items in his remarks to the convention Thursday. He instead outlined the House’s achievements under Trump and said voters need to stay the course.

“We’ve succeeded in so many ways, but it takes more than just 20 months to fix the total disaster that we were handed and to turn the ship of state around,” he said. “We know the job isn’t finished yet, but we are all in this together.”

Echoing many other convention speakers, Johnson focused on the threats posed by Democrats: “The alternative is to turn the reins over right now to the radical Marxists who are planning to dramatically grow the government, raise your taxes, drive costs through the roof, and rob you of your freedom.”

But some worried that message might not be sufficient — especially after Democrats’ 2024 message focused largely on preventing another Trump presidency rather than pointing to affirmative plans to tackle rising prices and other key voter concerns.

Roy is not on the ballot this fall after losing a primary for Texas attorney general, but he is helping to campaign for other Republicans. He, too, said his message is that GOP candidates “need to be able to finish the job” and cited an “enormous amount of good work” — listing as examples the Laken Riley Act, a small-bore immigration bill that passed early in Trump’s second term, and federal spending cuts embedded in the megabill.

As for the rest of the GOP messaging, Roy added, “Right now, I would argue we’re focused a little bit too much on how crazy they are instead of talking about all the great stuff we’ve done.”

Congress

House sets vote on Russia sanctions bill

Published

2 days ago

September 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

House lawmakers are set to vote on the sweeping Russia sanctions bill that senators overwhelmingly voted to approve in August, but now faces a tough test in the House where Democrats fear the bill will give President Donald Trump too much tariff power.

The Senate-passed and White House-backed measure is finally getting consideration from the House, after GOP leaders omitted it from their agenda when lawmakers returned from August recess. Many House Democrats — including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries — have voiced opposition for fear that it would give Trump expansive and risky new tariff authorities.

House GOP enthusiasm for the measure has also been tepid, after a boost following the sudden death of its champion, Sen. Lindsey Graham, wore off.

The House Rules Committee scheduled a meeting to consider the bill Monday afternoon.

Advocates of the legislation argue the bill would give Trump the tools he needs to pressure Russian leader Vladimir Putin to end the war on Ukraine. The bill would issue mandatory sanctions on Russian leadership and its energy sector — as well as collaborators in Moscow’s defense industry and so-called shadow fleet.

But it would also give Trump the ability to hit top buyers of Russian oil with 100% tariffs, a move that Democrats say is dangerous given the White House’s eagerness to slap tariffs on U.S. friends and foes alike.

“Donald Trump already has ample authority to impose sanctions on the companies, individuals, and vessels propping up a Russian war machine that continues its deadly attacks on Ukraine,” Reps. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) and Richard Neal (D-Mass.) wrote in a joint statement with Democratic Rep. Don Beyer of Virginia and Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) earlier this month. “Congress does not need to greenlight new tariff authority for the President to impose those sanctions on Russia today.”

Backers of the bill were quick to encourage its passage after the vote was announced on Friday.

“Great news that the House will vote on the much-needed Russia sanctions bill,” Senate Foreign Relations ranking member Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) wrote on social media. “Ukrainian civilians continue to be killed by Putin’s war machine, and this bill hits the Kremlin’s coffers hard. Now is the time to pass it and force Putin to the negotiating table.”

The measure passed in an 86-11 vote in the Senate in August.

Congress

House eyes Tuesday vote on bill to curb data center costs

Published

2 days ago

September 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

House GOP leaders have picked Tuesday as the day to vote on legislation intended to shield Americans from the potential costs associated with the data center boom, according to two people granted anonymity to share private scheduling plans.

The upcoming floor action comes after a healthy number of vulnerable Republicans signed onto the measure in recent days, a sign that fears about the issue’s political volatility ahead of the midterms are continuing to grow as voters complain about rising energy prices as a result of data center proliferation.

The bipartisan Ratepayer Protection Act, which aims to compel tech companies to pay for the infrastructure associated with data center development, passed unanimously out of the House Energy and Commerce Committee this summer. Senior Republicans, however, said last week they were still weighing whether to bring the bill to the floor before the House recesses until after the November elections.

The decision to proceed this coming week signals that pressure has been building on leaders to act, underscored by the at least five House GOP frontliners who have signed on as cosponsors since September 1: Reps. Bill Huizenga and Tom Barrett of Michigan, David Valadao of California, Jen Kiggans of Virginia and Mónica de la Cruz of Texas.

Valadao, in an interview a week before he signed on as a cosponsor, called such measures “fine” but balked at the idea House Democratic leaders were trying to politicize data centers right before an election.

“Obviously it has to be addressed — making sure that we’re protecting our natural resources like water in my district,” he said. “Obviously, with California and their regulatory process, they’ve made energy more expensive than anywhere else in the country. So those are major concerns that need to be addressed, and I think those pieces of legislation will make sense.”

But, he added, allowing Democrats “to turn this into a political issue, I would say, is pretty irresponsible.”

The total number of cosponsors on the bill, championed by Reps. Gabe Evans (R-Colo.) and Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), to 42 Democrats and Republicans combined.

The Tuesday vote will take place under an expedited procedure that requires a two-thirds majority of those present and voting to secure passage.

Mia McCarthy and Amelia Davidson contributed to this report.