by Republicans in Congress who have spent months demanding that any aid to Ukraine be accompanied by a crackdown on migration to the United States got what they asked for when a bipartisan group of senators released a $118.3 billion deal that would provide both.
On Monday, many of them rejected it anyway.
It was the latest sign that the political ground for any deal on immigration – particularly in an election year when it is expected to be a central issue of the presidential campaign – has disappeared.
With former President Donald J. Trump eager to attack President Biden’s record on the border and right-wing Republicans in Congress lining up behind him, reaching a deal was always going to be a long shot. The long-awaited release Sunday night of the text of the 370-page bill only served to inflame Republican divisions over an issue that once united them.
Even when Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader and supporter of funding for Ukraine, took the floor to press for action on the bill, many of his fellow Republican leaders attacked him fiercely. President Mike Johnson denounced the move as “even worse than we expected” and, in a joint statement with his leadership team, repeated what had become his mantra about the deal: that it would be “dead on arrival” Camera.
Even more moderate Republican voices, such as Senator John Cornyn of Texas, who had encouraged the negotiations, said they had “serious concerns” after reviewing them. (Mr. Cornyn, who is often mentioned as a possible successor to McConnell as Republican leader, notably gave the statement to the far-right news outlet Breitbart.)
On Monday night, McConnell privately acknowledged that the measure had hemorrhaged support among Republicans and recommended that they move to block it unless Democrats agreed to debate it further and allow them to propose changes.
It pointed to a bleak outlook for the complicated compromise bill that followed a long-standing pattern on Capitol Hill, where major immigration deals have often come close to being enacted only to fall apart just short of the finish line after Republicans will condemn them for being too weak.
The first test of the measure will occur on Wednesday, when an initial procedural vote is scheduled. It needs 60 votes to advance, meaning at least 10 Republicans would have to back it. Even if the bill could clear that hurdle and pass the Senate, there appears to be no path forward in the House.
“The $64,000 question now is whether or not senators can drown out the outside noise, drown out people like Donald Trump who want chaos and do what’s right for America,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, the majority leader. in a speech in the Senate. floor on Monday afternoon. “I urge senators of good will on both sides of the aisle to do the right thing and disengage from the chaos.”
Schumer reminded his colleagues that “we live in an era of divided government, and that means both sides must reach an agreement if we want to pass a bill.”
However, the Republicans’ withdrawal from the agreement also threatened to undermine support on the left, where some Democrats are reluctant to support a bill that pro-immigration groups have denounced as a betrayal of American values and that some conservative groups as the National Border Patrol Council were endorsing.
For Democrats who have pushed for any immigration measure to include legal status for large groups of undocumented people, including so-called Dreamers brought to the United States as children, a vote for a bill that contains no such provisions and does not It has a way to become the law anyway, it is a bitter pill to swallow.
Among Republicans, there is even less enthusiasm for finding a middle ground at the start of an election year in which Trump is already winning the nomination contest. He has once again made the border a central pillar of his campaign and has encouraged Republicans to oppose anything other than the hardline policies he instituted as president. And his “America First” foreign policy approach has also helped undermine GOP support for sending aid to Ukraine for its war against Russian aggression.
Sen. Steve Daines, Republican of Montana and chairman of the Senate Republicans’ campaign arm, reiterated Trump’s talking points on Monday by saying bluntly that he would vote “no” on the bill.
“I cannot support a bill that fails to secure the border, provides taxpayer-funded lawyers to illegal immigrants, and gives billions to radical open border groups,” he said on social media.
By Monday morning, at least 15 Senate Republicans and three Senate Democrats had made clear they would oppose the bill, raising questions about whether Schumer and McConnell would be able to get the 60 votes needed for its passage.
“Make no mistake, a challenge has been issued and the United States must accept it,” McConnell said Monday afternoon about sending critical funds to Ukraine.
In an unusual turn that underscored the Republican divide, an aide to Senate Republican leadership who insisted on anonymity on Monday afternoon circulated a point-by-point rebuttal to House Republican leaders’ statement criticizing the bill. law.
But later, in a private meeting with Republicans, McConnell recommended they vote no on Wednesday in an attempt to force Democrats to allow them to propose changes to the bill, according to people familiar with his comments who described them on condition of anonymity. . And he did nothing to try to persuade his colleagues not to oppose the measure, bowing to an increasingly obvious reality.
Publicly, Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the second Republican who had joined McConnell in pushing for the bipartisan deal, was noncommittal, suggesting members of his party might be reluctant to support a measure criticized as too weak. Otherwise it could become law.
“People want a result,” he told reporters. “They want a result if we’re going to go through this process.”
Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, who was the lead Republican negotiator on the border deal, couldn’t hide his frustration with his own party as he tried to explain the final product that was released after more than three months of daily negotiations. The same Republicans who complained that they needed more time to read the bill, Lankford said, were quick to denounce him on social media.
“Are we as Republicans going to hold press conferences and complain that the border is bad and then intentionally leave it open after the worst month in American history in December?” he said on “Fox & Friends.”
The answer seemed like a clear yes. And late Monday night, even he refused to say whether he would vote to allow his package to move forward.
Some progressive senators also said the deal missed the mark.
Sen. Alex Padilla of California, who is Hispanic, condemned the bill for failing to provide relief to Dreamers and making it harder for immigrants to be granted asylum. He lamented that not a single member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus was included in the negotiations.
“While bipartisanship requires political compromise, it does not require compromising our nation’s core values,” said Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Global Refuge, calling the bill an abandonment of “our legal obligations and morals towards the people who seek refuge. .”
Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat, indicated in a statement that he was holding his nose as he supported the bill, largely because the future and destiny of Europe were tied up in the mix.
“Bipartisan agreement can help, but nothing short of comprehensive reform will truly solve this problem,” he said in a carefully worded statement. On the Senate floor, he lamented the fact that the measure would not provide any relief to Dreamers.
“Without action from Congress, they spent every day in fear of being deported,” he said. “They grew up with our children; “many have gone on to serve our nation.”
The Congressional Hispanic Caucus said Monday afternoon that funding for Ukraine was not a sufficient reason to support a bill that included policies that were not in line with its values.
“We cannot simply give up and accept bad immigration policies that destroy asylum and could delay true bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform by 10 to 15 years, in order to get temporary relief,” he said in a statement.
Karoun Demirjian contributed reports.
