Congress

Republicans want to go it alone on ICE funding. It might be a slippery slope.

Published

5 months ago

April 3, 2026

If last year’s Republican megabill served as Congress’ gateway drug to party-line government funding, the GOP’s latest spending plan makes clear it was habit-forming.

Nine months ago, Republicans used the budget reconciliation process to skirt a Democratic filibuster and enact more than $280 billion for the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security. It shattered conventional wisdom on Capitol Hill that reconciliation’s special power couldn’t — and shouldn’t — be used to circumvent the across-the-aisle work Congress does each year to fund federal agencies.

Now President Donald Trump has given congressional Republicans until June 1 to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement — an entire government agency — through a partisan process that won’t require a single Democratic vote. Republicans are also mulling whether to fund a war in the Middle East that same way, with the White House considering a $200 billion request for supplemental funding for the Pentagon.

Republicans say this is happening because Democrats refuse to back a full Department of Homeland Security funding measure without adding guardrails on immigration enforcement activities the GOP finds intolerable, leading to the current record-breaking shutdown. Democrats also are unlikely to support giving the Trump administration additional dollars to bolster its military presence in Iran.

“Democrats have put us where we are, and we have to deal with it,” Sen. John Hoeven of North Dakota, a senior Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, told reporters Monday. “We don’t have a choice.”

But Hoeven also acknowledged it could be a slippery slope. Asked whether he was worried about setting a new precedent, he conceded, “Me, as an appropriator? Yeah.”

Democrats previously used their own party-line bills during the Biden administration to fund programs opposed by Republicans, such as an $80 billion infusion for IRS tax enforcement. But that was in addition to the funding agencies received through regular appropriations, not as a substitute for it.

Democrats are pushing back on the idea they are responsible for the GOP’s go-it-alone approach — and they are warning about dire consequences.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), a senior appropriator, said it would be “a tragic mistake” for Republicans to bankroll a war while sidelining their minority party colleagues.

Enacting funding through reconciliation, Coons said, “requires no compromise with the other party. And if that becomes the sole way we fund the core functions of government, that is a bad idea.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune suggested Thursday that the fallout from the current funding fight could have long-term implications, warning that it’s “not good for the country or for the future of the appropriations process or, for that matter, the future of the Senate.”

It’s just the latest blow to bipartisan norms of the congressional appropriations process during Trump’s second term. White House budget director Russ Vought has executed a playbook for undercutting cross-party funding negotiations, and Republican leaders have gone along with those tactics, including the stopgap funding patch that riled Democrats last spring and the enactment of a clawbacks package last summer that canceled billions of dollars Congress previously cleared with bipartisan support.

Many Republicans aren’t happy with how the latest step is unfolding, with top GOP appropriators especially concerned about funding a war effort without Democratic buy-in.

“I would prefer not to,” House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said late last month about clearing an emergency military package through the party-line process. But, he added, “we’ll wait and see. A lot of that depends on what the Democrats want to do.”

Three Hill Republican aides, granted anonymity to speak candidly, privately forecasted that the current funding breakdown will fuel a tit-for-tat future for the appropriations process. The worry is that Republican presidents will routinely be forced to use reconciliation to clear immigration enforcement funding through Congress, and Democratic presidents will have to use it to fund nondefense efforts GOP leaders are less keen on boosting.

Republicans are now exploring enacting immigration enforcement funding for the remainder of Trump’s presidency — not just the current fiscal year.

Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas, the top Democrat on the Homeland Security funding panel, said a future Congress under Democratic control could follow the GOP’s example and use reconciliation to fund agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency or the Department of Health and Human Services.

“So I certainly have concerns with a bad precedent that they will be setting,” Cuellar said in an interview Thursday.

Matt Glassman, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Government Affairs Institute, said “the big deal here” is “shoving the dysfunctional discretionary stuff into reconciliation.”

“Because of the ability to do party-line legislating in the reconciliation bills, it allows a back door to party-line discretionary appropriating,” he said in an interview.

Glassman also sees the creeping use of reconciliation as a way to sidestep mutually negotiated guardrails on spending. Limitations on use of money, and how much time agencies have to spend it, are longtime hallmarks of bipartisan funding negotiations.

“If you throw money into these bills, then you lose sort of the control aspect that they love to put into the appropriations with the limitation provisions,” Glassman said.

Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) said last week that Democrats’ refusal to fund the Border Patrol or ICE without major policy changes “sets a precedent that they may one day come to regret.”

Other senior congressional appropriators contend that the bipartisan agreements Collins helped broker in recent months are proof that the annual funding process is working and that reconciliation is not a workable alternative. Despite the DHS drama, Congress managed to approve more than $1.6 trillion for every other federal department following a 43-day government shutdown last fall.

Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the House’s leading Democratic appropriator, said in a statement this week that “reconciliation will never be a substitute for the appropriations process.”

“Republicans must realize our country is safer and stronger when government funding decisions are made by both Democrats and Republicans in the House and in the Senate,” she added.

Riley Rogerson contributed to this report.

Congress

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

Published

1 day 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.