Democrats to Fund Wall, Expand ICE

[Captdon]

A billion bucks is nothing.

The wall is being built despite Congress.

Where? The only building is what was already paid for.

[roadmaster]

[donttread]

*sighs*

After all that fighting and resistance, the Senate Democrats have just capitulated to Trump, reaching a deal with their Republican counterparts to provide the Trump Administration with $1.4 billion toward the construction of a steel wall (the kind that Trump has proposed) along the southern border after having spent the last month insisting on "no money for the wall" to quote House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (who has already announcement her decision to support this deal that's been crafted by the leading Senators)...and also, as a bonus, provides a 20% increase in funding for ICE, which, The Hill has noted, provides "enough flexibility to reach the president’s requested level of 52,000 beds", whereas the Democrats had originally proposed a small reduction to 35,000 beds. The deal includes nothing about DACA or any other form of concession by the Republicans.

Watching the coverage of this unfolding news last night, the Democrat they had on Lawrence O'Donnell's program tried to spin this as a political victory for the Democrats by pointing out that the deal includes less money for the border wall than a clean continuing resolution would have provided ($2 billion). First of all, that's not the same as the "no money for the wall" line and secondly it was also pointless concession, considering that the White House has made clear its intention to declare a national emergency to secure Trump's full requested $5.7 billion in wall funding anyway. To quote Trump at his "Finish the Wall" rally in El Paso, Texas last night on this development: "We probably have some good news," he said, referencing the fact that the Democrats were likely to cave on calls for a cap on immigrant detentions, before going on to add, "We’re building the wall, anyway. The wall is going to be built." His meaning was clear, as White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney told Fox News Sunday over the weekend that "We’ll take as much money as you can give us and then we will go off and find the money someplace else legally in order to secure that southern barrier. But this is going to get built with or without Congress." See what I mean?

Up to now, I've been impressed with Nancy Pelosi's performance as the new House Speaker. With her decision to sign onto this total capitulation though, you know, I'm remembering why I was disappointed with her leadership under George W. Bush the first time she was the Speaker. Back in those days, the main issue on the public's mind was the Iraq War and the top priority item on the official agenda of the House Democrats, who had just won back the House in the 2006 midterm elections, was the goal of bringing the troops home, which I strongly supported. To that end, I was pleased when, relatively early on in 2007, the new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi successfully passed a bill renewing funding for the Iraq War...that included a binding timetable for the withdrawal of the combat troops (though leaving room for a comparatively small "residual" force to stay behind that would not play a leading role in combat operations). She had Bush cornered! He could either sign the bill and agree to gradually wind down our combat involvement in Iraq or else he could veto it and allow ALL funding for the war to expire, forcing an immediate withdrawal of ALL U.S. troops from Iraq! My assumption was the he would see the first as the better option and sign the bill. But he vetoed it, insisting on a clean funding bill; one with no withdrawal timetable attached. My view was that the Democrats should just keep sending him similar bills to the original because eventually the existing war funding would expire and he would have no choice but to capitulate and sign one of them. Instead, the Democrats capitulated and gave him a relatively clean bill to fund the continuation of major military operations in Iraq that included only such unrelated stipulations as that the minimum wage be increased. And thereafter, each time Iraq War funding threatened to expire, they just sent him clean funding bills. It's aaaaaaaalllllllllll coming back to me now!

To state the obvious, this isn't a deal I agree with and it's not exactly been the position of the more progressive Democrats either. This is one of the issues on which I very much agree with the progressive movement. Though only a minority faction of the Democratic Party, I sincerely hope that the latter will collectively vote against this deal when it is inevitably transformed into a bill later this week. And if you think for one second that that's an unreasonable expectation in the face of another possible government shutdown, think about this: if Trump gains something from this whole episode that we as a nation have been having for the last two months or so, what then is to discourage him from repeating these tactics over other issues? What is to discourage him or the Congressional Republicans from threatening to shut down the government again and again in the future over any political demand that they want?

The minute you see them as more like one party than two it all starts to make sense. Their motives ( 95% of the votes cast without really being held to any standard, even to occasionally balance a budget) becomes clear. I have always said that nothing gets done about illegal immigration because it serves both so called "major parties". Trump brought a wild card into the game so now they are gaming us but any solution they arrive at will be little better than a bandaid . A small example being the very idea that we need a wall AND more beds at the same time.
I know it goes against every fiber of your being but try to look at them as one and it starts to fall into line. Another example ? Despite the polar differences in talk Bush and Obama both presided over war, corporate welfare , state's rights intrusions and set spending and debt records while berating the the "other's guys budget".
I'm not saying they have a secret Donkephant National Committee or that the game even requires spoken conspiracy. But I am saying that when it comes down to action there is little difference between the results they produce and that no matter how poorly they manage the country they collectively keep virtually all the power. Nice work if you can get it. And collectively they can

[MisterVeritis]

Where? The only building is what was already paid for.

Where? I suppose in the places where a barrier os most needed.

[Captdon]

Where? I suppose in the places where a barrier os most needed.

He isn't building anyplace that Congress hasn't allowed him to build. He hasn't done anything about the wall building except what Congress says he can do and that is not much. iI isn't the amount of money or the miles of wall he called for. He has not kept his word.

Unless he does something he can legally do without Congress, he has violated the biggest promise he made. and all the talk he has done, including last night.

If he think his core voters will accept less than what he said without a fight on his part, he is going home early. He can lose the fight as long as he fights the fight. So far, he hasn't.

[jet57]

They are funding nothing they gave a pittance of whats needed and trump has already said hes building the wall anyway.

The democrats "ploy" so they can say they funded the wall which is a LIE

In the budget deal they offered 1.375 billon for 55 miles. NOT acceptable

The only thing Trump's gonna build is a bigger case for getting himself out of office. There's going to be no wall, Mexico is laughing their asses off at us, Russia is laughing their asses off at us, China is laughing their asses off at us, so is north Korea; why? because we have a flaming moron in office who lies through his teeth for fun and profit.

[Cletus]

One thing to consider is that the government has had a hard time getting wall construction projects going- they lost a lot of obligated monies last decade over this. Perhaps getting small amounts at a time is the way to go. Get a little, build a little, get more, build more, etc.

I think that is the approach the President needs to take.

[zachroidott]

The only thing Trump's gonna build is a bigger case for getting himself out of office. There's going to be no wall, Mexico is laughing their asses off at us, Russia is laughing their asses off at us, China is laughing their asses off at us, so is north Korea; why? because we have a flaming moron in office who lies through his teeth for fun and profit.

You really shook the pillars of Heaven.

[Dr. Who]

Yeah, nothing say win like less money

Especially when the offer was $1.6B in November: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...r-wall-funding

[Tahuyaman]

The only thing Trump's gonna build is a bigger case for getting himself out of office. There's going to be no wall, Mexico is laughing their asses off at us, Russia is laughing their asses off at us, China is laughing their asses off at us, so is north Korea; why? because we have a flaming moron in office who lies through his teeth for fun and profit.

That’s what elections are for.