Jamiesfeast – One of the most fiercely contested components of the bipartisan border security package is a new power granted to the U.S. government to prevent migrants from entering the country. Democrats needed to be convinced to include this provision.
Many Republicans who oppose the legislation are now making the central argument that it would incentivize even more border crossings.
The bipartisan package includes a provision that grants the Homeland Security secretary emergency authority to restrict entry for the majority of individuals if there is an average of over 4,000 people attempting to enter the country unlawfully per day for a week. Once the number exceeds 5,000 or if there are 8,500 unlawful entry attempts in a single day, the use of this authority becomes mandatory.
The senators released a bill on Sunday that aims to reduce the number of migrants and implement various measures. These measures include making it more challenging to claim asylum at the border and expanding detention facilities.
If the proposal becomes law, the new authority could be activated very quickly. This is because in December, the number of border encounters exceeded 10,000 on certain days, making it the highest month on record for illegal crossings. President Joe Biden has expressed his intention to utilize this authority to “shut down” the border.
Many Republicans argue that the number should remain at zero. Furthermore, there are those who have created the perception that the bill would enable an additional 5,000 migrants to enter each day or relax the existing criteria.
Former President Donald Trump labeled the notion of a 5,000 threshold as “record-setting stuff” even before the text was unveiled. He expressed his belief that endorsing the package, which encompasses $60 billion in wartime aid for Ukraine, would be a “death wish” for Republicans.
The swift and resounding opposition from Republican lawmakers who have consistently advocated for stronger border measures has been a source of frustration for some members within their own party. This backlash indicates that the bipartisan bill has minimal prospects for being passed, particularly during an election year. House Speaker Mike Johnson has deemed it as “dead on arrival,” and an official Twitter account for House Republicans has introduced a new hashtag: #killthebill.
The bill’s provisions and the efforts made by certain Republicans to halt its progress are worth examining.
NEGOTIATORS PUSH BACK
This Article Includes
The Senate bill has three main negotiators: Republican Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma, Independent Senator Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, and Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut. These negotiators have all responded to criticism of the bill by highlighting its focus on preventing illegal immigration rather than promoting it. They stress that if the number of illegal border crossings exceeds a certain threshold, migrants would no longer be able to apply for asylum.
The policy is reminiscent of one that was initially implemented by Trump. It is called Title 42 and it serves as a justification for swiftly removing migrants from the country, with the intention of preventing the spread of COVID-19.
Lankford has consistently stressed that the emergency authority is not intended to facilitate the entry of 5,000 people, but rather to shut down the border and redirect 5,000 individuals back.
In a conversation with reporters after his meeting with Republicans at the Capitol on Monday evening, Lankford emphasized that once he clarifies the situation, people come to understand it. He pointed out that the misinformation surrounding the issue has been repeated so often that many individuals automatically revert to the false belief that the policy allows 5,000 people to enter each day. Despite being factually incorrect, the constant repetition gives it an air of truth.
Lankford also expressed a willingness to make adjustments to the bill, given that Republicans have expressed opposition to it.
According to Sinema, a significant number of individuals are currently being released into the country under existing legislation. She emphasized the importance of providing the administration, as well as future administrations, with the necessary tools to effectively manage border control.
In a recent post on X, Murphy expressed his frustration with a particular line of attack on the bill, calling it “made up bad faith nonsense.”
Some Republicans who oppose the bill have stated that they will only support border security measures if they result in a complete shutdown of the border.
MOVING THE GOAL POSTS
House Republicans initially proposed the idea of combining Ukraine aid with border security as the handling of the border by President Biden became a significant political concern for Trump and his party. Certain Republicans, who were against providing aid to Ukraine, privately speculated that Democrats would not be in favor of stricter border enforcement.
During a visit to the border earlier this year, Johnson, who took over after former Speaker Kevin McCarthy was removed from office in October, made it clear that he would only support a more stringent border security bill that had already been passed by the House. However, this approach was met with resistance from Democrats, making it an impractical solution.
SHUT DOWN THE BORDER?
In regards to the bill’s passing, Biden expressed his belief that it would grant him the necessary emergency authority to effectively address and control the situation at the border. He emphasized that, if the bill were currently in effect, he would take immediate action to shut down the border and swiftly implement necessary measures to rectify the situation.
Trade would still continue and individuals who are citizens or legal residents would be able to freely travel between borders if the authority were utilized. Migrants would still have the opportunity to apply at designated ports of entry. The administration would have a two-week period to cease the use of emergency authority once the average number of illegal crossings decreased by 75%.
ALL ABOUT THE POLITICS
During a recent meeting with GOP senators, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell recognized the difficulty of the situation, stating that the border issue, which was once a unifying factor, has now become a divisive one. McConnell admitted that despite his personal support, the compromise may not have enough votes to pass.
Last week, Republican Oklahoma Senator Markwayne Mullin, a former House member, expressed his concern that the bill may not be perceived as strong enough, even before the text was released.
According to Mullin, the challenge lies in the fact that there are many politicians vying for re-election, which the American people perceive negatively. This perception makes it difficult for politicians to overcome the negative sentiment and gain an advantage in their campaigns.
In a post on Sunday evening, Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, emphasized the complexity and confusion surrounding immigration law.
According to him, many members of Congress lack a thorough understanding of the issue, despite expressing their strong opinions. As a result, it becomes convenient for them to manipulate the narrative since the general public is often unaware of the true facts.