The spending bills that passed in the House on Thursday night reveal EXACTLY what Democrat priorities are…
The bills that were passed would end the partial government shutdown but without any money allocated to the border wall. Interestingly, the bills also included more than double what the President requested in funding for the wall, which would be handed out to other countries in the form of foreign aid.
One bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security until February 8, passed by 239-192 includes the statement that it would ‘keep border security funding at $1.3 billion, providing no new funding for the barrier along the southern border‘. The other bill passed 241-190 will fund the other six agencies through September.
The Dems are trying to play hardball on their opposition to the Wall with spending bills.
Good luck with that.
The White House has already indicated that President Trump will veto the bills if there is no money allocated for the wall. Senate Majority Leader ‘Cocaine’ Mitch McConnell(R-KY) has stated that he will not put forward a Senate bill that the President refuses to sign. So, basically, no wall funding, no deal.
The White House cited some examples that the Democrats have included funding for ‘unnecessary programs at excessive levels’ above what the Trump Administration has asked for. For example:
- $12 billion more for “international affairs programs,” including $2.9 billion more “for economic and development assistance, including funding for the West Bank/Gaza, Syria, and Pakistan, where our foreign aid is either frozen or under review.”
- $700 million more than requested for the United Nations, including restored funding for the United Nation’s Population Fund, which would undermine the administration’s Mexico City Policy that bars the use of taxpayer dollars for foreign organizations that “promote or perform abortions.”
- Approximately $2 billion more than requested for the Environmental Protection Agency
- $7.1 billion more than the administration requested for Housing and Urban Development programs
Here is the relevant segment of the White House statement:
Despite not meeting the minimum requirements identified by those who are directly responsible for the Nation’s border security, this package funds a number of unnecessary programs at excessive levels well beyond what was put forward in the FY 2019 Budget. The six bills provided for under H.R. 21 provide funding at levels nearly 20 percent higher than the President’s FY 2019 Budget. For instance, H.R. 21 provides $12 billion more for international EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503 affairs programs, 29 percent higher than the President’s request. This includes $2.9 billion more than the request for economic and development assistance, including funding for the West Bank/Gaza, Syria, and Pakistan, where our foreign aid is either frozen or under review. It includes $700 million more than requested for the United Nations, including restoring funding for the United Nations Population Fund. The bill would also undermine the President’s Mexico City Policy (Presidential Memorandum of January 23, 2017), which prohibits the funding of foreign nongovernmental organizations that promote or perform abortions. Further, H.R. 21 includes approximately $2 billion in excessive Environmental Protection Agency funding, providing funds beyond the Agency’s core mission and including funding for programs that can and should be executed at the local level. The bill also includes substantial unrequested funding for HUD programs, including $7.1 billion above the FY 2019 Budget request for HUD rental assistance programs. These and other excessive spending items makes the lack of adequate border funding in the combined package all the more unacceptable.
The statement ends with the following statement:
The Administration looks forward to working with the Congress to enact appropriations that will adequately secure the Nation’s borders and get the Federal Government back to work for the American people as soon as possible.
If only the Democrats were willing to put a higher priority on border security than on foreign aid spending. Doesn’t that tell you what you need to know about their priorities?
The issue of economic migrants crossing the border illegally is huge and one that is unsustainable at current levels. There are also horrible instances of criminals crossing into the United States and committing crimes which sometimes leads to the death of Americans. Republicans, under President Trump, have taken the issue of border security seriously and want to deal with this issue, while it seems that members of the Democratic party are simply reacting in knee-jerk opposition to anything that President Trump proposes, even if it is something that had received bipartisan support in the pre-Trump era.
As many have pointed out, Democrats complaining that the Wall is now suddenly ‘immoral’ (when it wasn’t until President Trump advocated for it) would mean that the Democrats, in order to remain consistent, should want to tear down the existing barriers at the border. Is that what they intend to do? I don’t think so.
Both sides are digging in their heels. Republicans say, ‘No wall funding, no end to the government shutdown,’ while Democrats are saying, ‘No wall funding — period.‘
Who do you think will blink first?
By the way, since Facebook has unpublished ClashDaily’s page, your best bet to keep in the loop is to Subscribe to our ClashDaily Newsletter right here:
We’re also moving onto a new platform, MeWe. It’s like Facebook without the data breaches and censorship.
Sign up and you can still get all the ClashDaily goodness by joining our MeWe group.
Do you love what we’re doing at Clash?
Do you want to kick in to our ‘war chest’ so that we Happy Warriors can maximize the size of the footprint we leave on Leftism’s backside? Here’s a link for ya to do just that.