Dissenting Vote on Border Funds Sought in House

Conservatives want a resolution saying President Obama has all the tools he needs to respond to the flood of undocumented immigrants.

WASHINGTON - SEPTEMBER 15: Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) listens during a news conference for the launch of the Congressional HIV/AIDS Caucus on Capitol Hill on September 15, 2011 in Washington, DC. Franks is a co-chair of the caucus, along with Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA) and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA). The bi-partisan caucus has attracted approximately 50 members. (Photo by Brendan Hoffman/Getty Images)
Billy House Rachel Roubein
July 28, 2014, 6:15 p.m.

As a pre­requis­ite to any House ac­tion on emer­gency fund­ing for the bor­der crisis, some House con­ser­vat­ives are push­ing for a vote this week on a res­ol­u­tion de­clar­ing that Pres­id­ent Obama already has “the ne­ces­sary tools at his dis­pos­al” to ad­dress the flood of un­doc­u­mented minors ar­riv­ing from Cent­ral Amer­ica.

The ef­fort rep­res­ents clear evid­ence of con­tin­ued res­ist­ance with­in the Re­pub­lic­an Con­fer­ence to­ward ap­prov­ing any por­tion of Obama’s re­quest for $3.7 bil­lion to deal with the surge of im­mig­rants. Such a vote would en­able these law­makers to put on the re­cord their reas­ons for be­liev­ing the ad­min­is­tra­tion does not need sup­ple­ment­al ap­pro­pri­ations.

Wheth­er it would also provide polit­ic­al cov­er for them if they then turned around and voted to provide even a smal­ler amount is doubt­ful. There ap­pears to be no guar­an­tee of GOP un­an­im­ity be­hind a bill al­low­ing in­creased spend­ing, even if Speak­er John Boehner per­mits a vote on a res­ol­u­tion of dis­sent.

The Re­pub­lic­an man­euv­er­ing con­tin­ues as the House is sched­uled to ad­journ on Thursday for all of Au­gust and in­to early Septem­ber. As a res­ult, time is run­ning out for Boehner to de­cide wheth­er to try to pass a bill be­fore the break in re­sponse to Obama’s re­quest, wheth­er it would be an ef­fort real­ist­ic­ally de­signed to get through both cham­bers, and wheth­er he will need to rely on Demo­crat­ic votes to do so.

Re­pub­lic­an lead­ers on Monday night were fi­nal­iz­ing lan­guage on the bill, to be presen­ted to House Re­pub­lic­ans in a closed-door con­fer­ence on Tues­day morn­ing. But rather than provid­ing fund­ing through the end of this cal­en­dar year””as was un­der con­sid­er­a­tion last week””Ap­pro­pri­ations Com­mit­tee Chair­man Har­old Ro­gers said Monday that this ver­sion would re­quire the money provided to be used by Sept. 30.

He would not identi­fy the pre­cise amount of fund­ing in the plan, oth­er than to say it would be un­der $1 bil­lion and would be off­set by spend­ing cuts else­where in the fed­er­al budget. Some sources have in­dic­ated it will be much less than $1 bil­lion.

Re­gard­less, it is ex­pec­ted to be sig­ni­fic­antly less than the Demo­crat­ic-led Sen­ate’s $2.7 bil­lion plan””which the White House said on Monday the ad­min­is­tra­tion sup­ports””and would be a greatly scaled back ver­sion of the pres­id­ent’s ini­tial $3.7 bil­lion re­quest. That might not be a prob­lem for the ad­min­is­tra­tion: The Con­gres­sion­al Budget Of­fice has pro­jec­ted that even un­der Obama’s pro­pos­al, just $25 mil­lion would ac­tu­ally be spent through Septem­ber.

“I think this bill is a fair, even-handed, suf­fi­cient ap­proach to solve the prob­lem. What the Sen­ate does, we’ll have to wait and see,” said Ro­gers, adding he was op­tim­ist­ic it could pass the House.

Against this back­drop, some fisc­al con­ser­vat­ives who have op­posed any more spend­ing did not ap­pear to be back­ing off Monday on their in­sist­ence that they be able to make their case on the House floor. That was un­der­scored in ef­forts to get a vote on a res­ol­u­tion au­thored by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ar­iz., and sent Monday to House lead­ers. A copy was ob­tained by Na­tion­al Journ­al.

That word­ing de­clares that, “Where­as the Pres­id­ent cur­rently has the ne­ces­sary tools at his dis­pos­al to solve the hu­man­it­ari­an crisis at the bor­der with ex­ist­ing fund­ing from Con­gress,” that “Now, there­fore be it re­solved: That the House of Rep­res­ent­at­ives agrees with the Pres­id­ent that there is an ac­tu­al hu­man­it­ari­an crisis on the bor­der that only un­der­scores the need to drop the polit­ics and fix our im­mig­ra­tion sys­tem once and for all.”

The res­ol­u­tion fur­ther calls on the pres­id­ent “to use the re­sources already at his dis­pos­al to gain cer­ti­fi­able con­trol of the bor­der.”

Among the courses of ac­tion re­com­men­ded in the res­ol­u­tion would be for the pres­id­ent to “cease re­leas­ing con­victed crim­in­al ali­ens from de­ten­tion,” be­gin “crack­ing down on fraud­u­lent asylum claims,” and be “giv­ing Bor­der Patrol agents ac­cess to fed­er­al lands where drug traf­fick­ers, hu­man smug­glers, and un­law­ful mi­grants hide.”

In ad­di­tion, the res­ol­u­tion ac­cuses the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion of hav­ing sent “a broad sig­nal to un­law­ful im­mig­rants that, once they enter the United States, they can re­main here in vi­ol­a­tion of the law without con­sequence.” It de­mands that Obama in­stead “send a clear mes­sage that those who are seek­ing to enter the United States il­leg­ally will be re­turned to their home coun­tries.”

The res­ol­u­tion says the House stands ready to work with the pres­id­ent so that these “calls to ac­tion are real­ized as ex­ped­i­tiously as pos­sible.”

Franks de­clined to com­ment on his res­ol­u­tion. But a seni­or GOP aide said the res­ol­u­tion has a clear pur­pose: “It should be a mat­ter of re­cord that even without any ad­di­tion­al fund­ing, Obama has the ne­ces­sary tools to be­gin stem­ming the flow of un­law­ful mi­grants.”

The aide ad­ded that many Re­pub­lic­ans ex­pressed their sup­port for such a vote in meet­ings last week of both the Re­pub­lic­an Study Com­mit­tee and the en­tire House Re­pub­lic­an Con­fer­ence.

What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
2 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
ARE YOU THE GATEKEEPER?
Sanders: Obama Is a Progressive
1 days ago
THE LATEST

“Do I think President Obama is a progressive? Yeah, I do,” said Bernie Sanders, in response to a direct question in tonight’s debate. “I think they’ve done a great job.” But Hillary Clinton wasn’t content to sit out the latest chapter in the great debate over the definition of progressivism. “In your definition, with you being the gatekeeper of progressivism, I don’t think anyone else fits that definition,” she told Sanders.

×