House Republicans’ bold promises to improve border security fell apart as soon as the majority was taken. They are now preparing for another attempt.
GOP lawmakers are reviving their search for immigration and border policy changes to help bridge the gap between more conservative centrists and the conference’s more gung-ho conservatives. These competing parties already made it necessary for party leaders to stop plans to quickly pass legislation during the first weeks in the new Congress. This turned a potential political advantage to Democrats into a lesson about the pitfalls of their slim majority.
They have kept their latest efforts from the limelight. However, the majority leader Steve Scalise (Republican-La.) is still involved in senior positions. According to four GOP lawmakers and their aides the group is quietly working on a list of border-related bills.
Republicans have offered ideas such as reviving border wall construction and cracking down upon asylum seekers. These policies are unlikely to pass the Senate, but they would allow them to claim a messaging win — if they manage to get them through the House.
It is obvious how quickly one of the most important Republican election talking points became a source of tensions old and new. Even those in the middle of intra-party debate aren’t prepared to publicly wager against another derailment.
“I can’t understand minds. “I can’t read minds,” Rep. Tom McClintock (R.Calif.), said in a short interview about whether House Republicans will pass a bill if it can be gotten out of committee and to its floor.
The GOP’s inability to unite on immigration and border bills is not new. It’s becoming a congressional cliché at this point as both sides struggle to reach any kind of comprehensive agreement. The lack of agreement caused a bitter feud among two Texas members, and led to reporters asking questions about Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s leadership.
It could also be a violation of a GOP tradition that Democrats are weak in border security. This is a point the party will likely use again in 2024.
The Republicans have attempted to communicate this message publicly to their still-nascent majority. They have made a series trips to the U.S. border with Mexico to emphasize its security problems, and they lambasted the Biden administration for their boycott of some of their field hearings.
This strategy has won some victories. When Green asked Raul Ortiz, Chief of the U.S. Border Patrol, whether DHS had operational control over all of the southern border, Green made headlines Wednesday. He replied: “No.”
Green continued with a clip of Alejandro Mayorkas, Department of Homeland Security Secretary, telling House lawmakers that DHS had operational control. Ortiz refused to comment on whether he believed that the secretary was lying, a charge that conservatives have made in calling for Mayorkas’ impeachment.
After Wednesday’s hearing, a DHS official pointed out Mayorkas’ remarks from last year’s separate Senate hearing. Mayorkas stated that, based on Green’s definition of “operational controls,” he said that “this country has never been under operational control.” (Democrats and some Republicans have supported Mayorkas, arguing that the impeachment call is a result of policy disagreements.
While Republicans continue to publicly fire at the Biden administration, they want to pursue legislative reforms. POLITICO was told by a leadership aide that they are in talks with members and leaders about the design of a border package.
They seem to have learned from their first mistake when they tried to vote quickly on a border bill within the first weeks of term. Instead of going straight to the floor, Republicans will first pass their next set of border-related bills through the Homeland Security and Judiciary committees.
As negotiations continue behind closed doors, neither committee has scheduled votes. Green will likely roll out a border bill in the next few weeks and hold a panel vote for April. Rep. Jim Jordan (Republican from Ohio) stated that his goal was to move legislation through Judiciary before March 31st. However, some aides believe that it may slip into April due to Congress’ usual pace.
Jordan stated in a short interview that “we’ve got a lot of bills we’re going to look at.” “We are just trying to be prepared.”
Jordan cited bills from Andy Biggs, Tom Tiffany and Chip Roy (Texas), as possible options for a border protection package that his committee will soon be considering. His bill, which was criticized by his party but did not ban asylum claims, caused his party’s legislative pains earlier in the year, sparking opposition from centrist conference members. Rep. Tony Gonzales (R.Texas), is openly arguing with Roy about border and immigration policies.
Roy rejected the criticisms of his asylum interpretation, but indicated that he is willing to allow leadership space for the time being. Instead of asking them to bring a border package to floor, he said that “the plan” was for it to be passed through the Judiciary Committee. (The Homeland Security panel where the package was also sent is not expected to vote on it.
Even if the bill passes Jordan’s panel it is not guaranteed it will withstand scrutiny by the larger conference. Even Republican members acknowledge that the committee is more conservatively biased than the entire GOP House. Leadership can only afford to lose a few of its members in a floor vote, if all Democrats oppose any legislation.
Leadership will decide whether the bills should be moved to the floor as a single package or separately if committees can advance legislation. Some members suggested merging the Judiciary or Homeland Security panels’ bills into one bill. This would be a risky move and could put Washington’s preferred deal-solving strategy of trying to get everyone to buy-in by creating a package too large to fail.
However, GOP aides privately admit that the math could be complicated. At a 30,000-foot level, border security generally unites Republicans, until you get into the details. Republicans could lose votes by making hardline changes to the asylum policies or Temporary Protected Status, (TPS).
Roy, however, drew his red line and warned that he wouldn’t just throw money at DHS. “We’re either going to change our policies or we’re not moving anything through here.”
A GOP aide said that the attempt to unify the conference on border policies was like trying to collect “frogs” in a bucket. According to an aide to the leadership, there have been no decisions about when bills will be brought to the floor or whether they would be one or multiple votes.
Rep. Dan Bishop (R.N.C.), who is a member both of the conservative House Freedom Caucus and the Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees, predicted that both panels would vote on border legislation within weeks. He said that he did not believe there was any “friction” in the conference, at least not when it came down to timing.
Bishop said that he would like leadership to bring a bill to the floor, even though it might fail.
Bishop stated, “I am indifferent whether it will pass” “I believe we must put the right bills on to the floor.”
