Without Ballroom Money, Senate Set To Consider Immigration Enforcement Funding Bill

The Senate is set finally to begin debate on the long-stalled immigration enforcement funding bill, which aims to fully fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Border Patrol, and Homeland Security Investigations through the end of President Trump’s term. The bill no longer includes security money for the president’s ballroom, however, which could which could present a problem once the facility is operational. The bill to fund immigration enforcement agencies became a necessity after Democrats refused to fund those same agencies without reforms to how officers conduct themselves and how broadly government search powers extend. In the end, the White House and Senate Democrats — who have the power to block such bills because of the 60-vote threshold — could not come to an agreement. Now, Republicans are moving forward with a nearly $70 billion bill to ensure that the agencies are kept open until the end of 2028. On Wednesday evening, the Senate voted to proceed with the bill by a margin of 53 to 46. What starts Thursday morning will be much more complicated than the simple motion to begin the debate and amendment process, however. That marathon, known as a “vote-a-rama,” will likely see dozens of amendments introduced to try to change the bill before it leaves the chamber. One of those amendments will be a provision to ban the creation of an “anti-weaponization fund” — something Mr. Trump has been pushing for weeks. In mid-May, the Senate was forced to leave town early due to a Republican revolt over what some have called a “slush fund” for criminals with ties to the president, including those who stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021. On Tuesday, the acting attorney general, Todd Blanche, told a House subcommittee that the Justice Department would not move forward with a fund to pay restitution to those who make claims that they are victims of a weaponized justice system. When pressed if he would put the commitment in writing, however, Mr. Blanche declined to do so, saying only that he would take that suggestion under “advisement.”Senators Thom Tillis and Bill Cassidy — two Republicans — have both vociferously spoken out against the fund and any future payout schemes that have a similar structure. Mr. Tillis, of North Carolina, told reporters on Tuesday that he plans to introduce a straightforward amendment to the immigration enforcement bill to block the creation of any such fund in the future. “If it’s dead and it’s not gonna come back then [the White House] would be supportive and endorse an amendment to make sure that it never comes back,” Mr. Tillis said.Dr. Cassidy, of Louisiana, has expressed similar openness to such a proposal, telling reporters that it would be appropriate to bar the administration from creating similar funds in the future. The majority leader, Senator John Thune, told reporters on Wednesday that he believes Mr. Tillis’s amendment would not be “germane” to the immigration funding bill, meaning it would require 60 votes to be added to the legislation rather than only 50. Senator Ted Cruz has predicted that somewhere around 20 GOP senators are opposed to the anti-weaponization fund, though Mr. Blanche’s assurances about the fund being nixed and the 60-vote threshold could lead many to vote against Mr. Tillis’s amendment. Mr. Trump, meanwhile, does not seem terribly thrilled that Mr. Blanche has ostensibly killed off the anti-weaponization fund, which was to be established from a settlement of Mr. Trump’s own lawsuit against the IRS. He also did not entirely shut the door on the fund existing, deferring to “lawyers” on whether or not it is really dead. “The weaponization fund, as far as I’m concerned, was a beautiful thing,” Mr. Trump said. “I didn’t make it, but I heard it, and I thought it was the greatest thing.”Beyond that fund, the $1 billion increase in funding for Secret Service — $220 million of which would go to Mr. Trump’s ballroom — has also been taken out of the bill after opposition from Republican senators. The secretary of homeland security, Markwayne Mullin, told lawmakers last month that the money was needed because private donations were not able to be used for the security aspects underneath the would-be ballroom.

Without Ballroom Money, Senate Set To Consider Immigration Enforcement Funding Bill

Without Ballroom Money, Senate Set To Consider Immigration Enforcement Funding Bill

More from the New York Sun

Congress Considers Amending Safe Drinking Water Act To Protect Communities From AI Data Center Costs

CAIR Files Ethics Complaint Against New Jersey High School Principal for Visiting Israel

Europe’s Liberal Elites Savor Jet-Set Amenities While Driving the Continent Toward Catastrophe

A Critic of Israel Accidentally Makes a Case for Zionism

Dakota Fanning Shines in the Tepid ‘The Sun Never Sets’

Will the Supreme Court Side With the Taliban Over 9/11 Families?

More on the Bessent Economic Boom Story

How a ‘Not Responsible’ Verdict for Lindsay Clancy Could Set Back Every Working Mother in America

More from the New York Sun

Congress Considers Amending Safe Drinking Water Act To Protect Communities From AI Data Center Costs

CAIR Files Ethics Complaint Against New Jersey High School Principal for Visiting Israel

Europe’s Liberal Elites Savor Jet-Set Amenities While Driving the Continent Toward Catastrophe

A Critic of Israel Accidentally Makes a Case for Zionism

Dakota Fanning Shines in the Tepid ‘The Sun Never Sets’

Will the Supreme Court Side With the Taliban Over 9/11 Families?

More on the Bessent Economic Boom Story

How a ‘Not Responsible’ Verdict for Lindsay Clancy Could Set Back Every Working Mother in America