Thursday, May 14, 2026

Never Miss An Opportunity

A good response. Sell that hard. It doesn’t quite fit on a bumper sticker, but the sentiment sells. Which brings us to this: The Parliamentarian ruled that major portions of the  bill pending in the Senate violated reconciliation rules. Border Patrol funding is dead, but two other sections of the bill fell for violations of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, and/or the Flores Settlement. Significantly, the Parliamentarian pointed to the OBBBA and “she pointed directly to how the Trump administration has already applied OBBBA spending as evidence of what this new money would actually do.” The Parliamentarian meant that money had been used in violation of the TVPRA and/or the Flores Settlement. It’s a point beyond the usual scope of the Parliamentarian, and one that indicates concerns that others could use effectively:
It is a notable move for a parliamentarian whose office is careful to note that its advice “is not a judgement on the relative merits of a particular policy.” MacDonough’s ruling is procedural, not political — but the practical effect lands like a sledgehammer on a package that Senate Republicans had structured as a workaround to Democratic opposition.

Senate Republicans opted to fund the bulk of DHS through the appropriations process while moving funding for immigration enforcement separately after talks with Democrats collapsed over reforms to ICE and CBP. That strategy required the reconciliation package to survive parliamentary review intact. It has not.

....

For immigration advocates and civil rights attorneys who have spent years defending the Flores Agreement and the TVPRA from executive branch erosion, the ruling is a rare procedural vindication. It is also a warning: the parliamentarian’s finding that the Trump administration’s OBBBA implementation itself constitutes evidence of intent is language that is likely to surface again in federal court.

The package now returns to the drawing board — with a Senate floor vote still on the calendar and a House that has yet to formally adopt the same budget resolution.
Relevant here for a few reasons. One, the $1 billion for the ballroom is supposed to be a part of this package. But many Senators don’t want to pass it, and it isn’t clear there are the votes in the House for it, either. So if it is stripped out, it likely dies. Now, about that $1.7 billion….

Congress has to authorize that, too. Trump is trying to end run the trial court. But he still needs Congressional approval for the money. It would be a slush fund for him, with a committee to oversee it that he appoints and controls, and no reporting on how the funds are used. But getting the DOJ to bless it doesn’t mean the Treasury can release the funds. If it does, impeachment proceedings should begin in January, 2027. But as Sen. Dirksen said, “A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you’re talking about real money.” A billion dollars for a ballroom is real money. $1.7 billion for a fund for Trump to control with no oversight or accountability? Very real money. Think he’s going to get it?

Neither do I. Should we beat him about the head and shoulders over it? Absolutely. Never miss an opportunity.

No comments:

Post a Comment