Senate Republicans launched debate on their party-line immigration enforcement bill Wednesday — a major step after nearly two weeks of delay — but they are facing lingering internal concerns over a proposed “Anti-Weaponization Fund” that could still scuttle the legislation.
Senators voted 53-46 on party lines to advance the bill, which would provide roughly $70 billion for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other Department of Homeland Security agencies.
An updated bill released Wednesday omits $1 billion in Secret Service security funding that had been included in an earlier draft and could have been used for President Donald Trump’s White House ballroom project. POLITICO first reported the decision to drop the funding last month.
It also strips out Justice Department funding unrelated to the controversial settlement fund — a move that GOP leaders made in hopes of making it harder to include language restricting or eliminating the fund. Top Republicans have warned that adding such language could threaten to tank the overall bill.
“Right now, the goal is to get the base bill across the finish line, and so hopefully all of our members who have amendment ideas will … keep in mind the need that we’ve got to keep the bill together and make sure we’ve got 50 votes for it at the end,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said.
Democrats said they did not expect to start voting on amendments until Thursday morning, but Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso expressed confidence that Republicans would ultimately have the votes to pass the bill.
“Democrats can drag it into the middle of the night if they want to, but we’re ready to go,” Barrasso said.
But several GOP senators signaled Wednesday they are still interested in adding language to block the fund, even after acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told House appropriators Tuesday that the administration would not move forward with it. While Blanche’s testimony was aimed at assuring GOP senators, his refusal to put the decision in writing and his praise for the underlying purpose of the fund — compensating Trump allies and others who were subject to allegedly politically motivated prosecutions — left some wary.
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said Blanche’s comments did not assuage his concerns.
“You want to make sure it’s really dead, and I think we can make it really dead,” he said.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said Blanche’s comments were “helpful” but that she would still vote for amendments to nix the fund. Sen. John Curtis (R-Utah) said he was waiting to see what specific amendments are offered and whether the Senate parliamentarian would rule that they could go in the filibuster-skirting immigration bill.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said Wednesday he would file his own amendment to eliminate the fund, though he acknowledged the parliamentarian could rule it needs to clear a 60-vote threshold to be added in rather than a simple majority of senators.
Tillis suggested he could ultimately vote against the overall bill if it does not include language nixing the fund.
“I wouldn’t support a bill that doesn’t have that in there,” Tillis said, adding that senators would just be “codifying the policy” that Blanche articulated Tuesday.
Calen Razor contributed to this report.
