Rand Paul's Standoff on the Border
How much does it cost to secure a border that President Trump has already closed? The Administration wants to maximize spending on border measures that aren't likely to cut illegal migration any further. But Congress can strike a better balance between security and fiscal responsibility.
The Senate Homeland Security Committee released text Thursday for the border section of the reconciliation bill, and its plans curb the excesses of the version the House passed last month. The biggest loser is the border wall, which would have its new funding slashed to $6.5 billion from $46.5 billion in the House bill. The Senate proposal devotes $39 billion to the border compared with the $62 billion approved in the House.
These lower funding levels are a better match for the current state of the border. Fewer than 13,000 illegal migrants have been apprehended while crossing the border in each of the past three months, compared with a peak of more than 300,000 in a single month under President Biden. President Trump halted illegal migration by pausing new asylum claims, which didn't require tens of billions of dollars for new barriers and surveillance.
Yet the White House wants to mark its agenda with a big dollar figure, and it's preparing to steamroll Senate opponents. When Sen. Rand Paul, who leads the Homeland Security Committee, described his spending plans on X last week, Trump adviser Stephen Miller accused him of 'trying to cut funding' for border security. It's usually a Democratic tactic to blast smaller spending increases as 'cuts,' but Mr. Miller used the line to lobby GOP Senators during a visit to Capitol Hill.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
11 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
‘Charles Sumner' Review: Fighting Slavery on the Senate Floor
Among the leaders of the Civil War era, figures such as Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman stand tall. Charles Sumner, the abolitionist and senator, was their contemporary—yet many Americans today associate his name with a single historical moment: when Preston Brooks, the representative from South Carolina, viciously beat him with a cane on the floor of the Senate Chamber in 1856. Sumner deserves to be remembered for much more than being the victim of Brooks's assault, argues Zaakir Tameez in his engrossing biography 'Charles Sumner: The Conscience of a Nation.' Mr. Tameez, a scholar of antitrust and constitutional law, has written an excellent book about the courageous Massachusetts senator, whom the author calls 'the most famous civil rights leader of the nineteenth century.' A physically and intellectually imposing figure whose heart 'bled for abolition, racial justice, and constitutional democracy,' Sumner pushed U.S. presidents and Senate colleagues alike to end slavery before the Civil War and to secure black rights during Reconstruction. Mr. Tameez's monograph joins Stephen Puleo's 'The Great Abolitionist' (2024) as the only two biographies of Sumner to have been published since David Herbert Donald's 'Charles Sumner and the Rights of Man' (1970). The excision of some repetitious material could have reduced the protracted length of Mr. Tameez's book, but 'Charles Sumner' is nonetheless an engaging account. Drawing from hundreds of letters, articles and speeches, Mr. Tameez has created a remarkable portrait of a complex man who faced many personal challenges. Depression stalked Sumner throughout his life, but his desire for racial justice gave him a sense of purpose and a will to live. As a young man, he struggled with his sexuality, partaking in 'romantic friendships' with married men—including Samuel Gridley Howe, the abolitionist and physician, and Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, the poet—and failing to find happiness with Alice Hooper, who abandoned him after mere months of matrimony. Heart disease afflicted Sumner in his older age, causing painful episodes of angina that sapped his strength and impeded his ability to work. Sumner's unwavering commitment to uplifting African-Americans was informed by his childhood on the North Slope of Boston's Beacon Hill, where he was born, in 1811, in a predominantly black community. Mr. Tameez describes Sumner's birthplace as 'featuring gaslit lamps, steep cobblestone roads, and redbrick sidewalks'; these distinctive elements didn't emerge until years later, but Beacon Hill at the turn of the 19th century was exceptional in other ways. Approximately 1,000 free African-Americans lived there and helped produce a 'bubbling movement of Black abolitionism,' Mr. Tameez tells us, making the neighborhood 'a beacon of hope' at a time when slavery was still legal in many states.
Politico
11 minutes ago
- Politico
Vance to visit Los Angeles on Friday amid tension over ICE raids
Vice President JD Vance is set to travel to Los Angeles on Friday amid tensions in the city over the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. Vance will 'tour a multi-agency Federal Joint Operations Center, a Federal Mobile Command Center, meet with leadership and Marines, and deliver brief remarks,' according to a readout of the vice president's travel plans. The trip comes after Los Angeles had been rocked with significant anti-ICE protests for which President Donald Trump deployed National Guard troops and Marines to subdue, drawing condemnation from Democrats. The protests and unrest have since quieted — Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass lifted a curfew earlier this week — but the troops have remained. Gov. Gavin Newsom sued the administration to retain control of the California National Guard troops, but a federal appeals court on Thursday indefinitely blocked Newsom's efforts , landing the administration a win.
San Francisco Chronicle
11 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Judge rules Trump administration can't require states to help on immigration to get transport money
BOSTON (AP) — A federal judge on Thursday blocked the Trump administration from withholding billions of dollars in transportation funds from states that don't agree to participate in some immigration enforcement actions. Twenty states sued after they said Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy threatened to cut off funding to states that refused to comply with President Donald Trump's immigration agenda. U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr. barred federal transportation officials from carrying out that threat before the lawsuit is fully resolved. 'The Court finds that the States have demonstrated they will face irreparable and continuing harm if forced to agree to Defendants' unlawful and unconstitutional immigration conditions imposed in order to receive federal transportation grant funds,' wrote McConnell, the chief judge for the federal district of Rhode island. 'The States face losing billions of dollars in federal funding, are being put in a position of relinquishing their sovereign right to decide how to use their own police officers, are at risk of losing the trust built between local law enforcement and immigrant communities, and will have to scale back, reconsider, or cancel ongoing transportation projects.' On April 24, states received letters from the Department of Transportation stating that they must cooperate on immigration efforts or risk losing the congressionally appropriated funds. No funding was immediately withheld, but some of the states feared the move was imminent. Attorneys general from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, Wisconsin and Vermont filed the lawsuit in May, saying the new so-called 'Duffy Directive' put them in an impossible position. 'The States can either attempt to comply with an unlawful and unconstitutional condition that would surrender their sovereign control over their own law enforcement officers and reduce immigrants' willingness to report crimes and participate in public health programs — or they can forfeit tens of billions of dollars of funds they rely on regularly to support the roads, highways, railways, airways, ferries, and bridges that connect their communities and homes,' the attorneys general wrote in court documents. But acting Rhode Island U.S. Attorney Sara Miron Bloom told the judge that Congress has given the Department of Transportation the legal right to set conditions for the grant money it administers to states, and that requiring compliance and cooperation with federal law enforcement is a reasonable exercise of that discretion. Allowing the federal government to withhold the funds while the lawsuit moves forward doesn't cause any lasting harm, Bloom wrote in court documents, because that money can always be disbursed later if needed. But requiring the federal government to release the money to uncooperative states will likely make it impossible to recoup later, if the Department of Transportation wins the case, Bloom said.
