Tweet Share Share Comment

It would be tempting to describe the negotiation over the Senate’s border bill, which died this week, shortly after it was introduced, as having been a pointless waste of time. That would certainly be the view of frustrated staffers and reporters who spent long hours over the last few months working on it and covering it.

“It looks to me, and to most of our members, as if we have no real chance here to make a law,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday afternoon as he stuck a fork in it, following a couple of days of heated meetings in which Republicans groused about the border package that Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford—acting at McConnell’s behest—struck with Democrats.

Advertisement

But while it would’ve been nice if the proposal could have reached this outcome—instant death—on a more abbreviated timeline, this fruitless endeavor was still a necessary step towards resolving the battle that underlies it: Discovering the legislative path, if there still is one, towards getting additional military aid to Ukraine.

This saga goes back to the aftermath of the 2022 midterm elections.

Republicans took control of the House of Representatives by a far slimmer margin than they had projected, empowering a far-right faction that was always skeptical of arming Ukraine to hold disproportionate sway within the conference. Congressional leaders at the time, along with anyone who paid even vague attention to politics, could foresee the problems that Speaker Kevin McCarthy would have when he took the gavel. So, in Dec. 2022, Senate leaders and outgoing House Democratic leaders tucked as much Ukraine funding as they could into a government funding bill that would last through Sept. 2023.

Advertisement

A lot happened when that Sept. 2023 deadline arrived. McCarthy couldn’t get enough House Republicans to pass any funding bill whatsoever on their own. So in the 11th hour, he put a short-term spending bill on the floor that could pass on a bipartisan basis—but he threw a bone to the far right by omitting Ukraine aid from it. McCarthy had told President Biden that he would pass separate legislation allowing the administration to continue transferring weaponry to Ukraine later on. But there was no “later on.” McCarthy lost his job on Oct. 3.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

When Speaker Mike Johnson took over, he informed the Democratic Senate and White House that “supplemental Ukraine funding is dependent upon enactment of transformative change to our nation’s border security laws.” That was McConnell’s read of his own conference, too, and he agreed that Republicans “are going to want something serious about the border” in order to pass an international aid bill—which, by that point, also included aid to Israel following the Oct. 7 Hamas attack.

Advertisement

The chances of a broad immigration deal coming together, even in the best of times, are slim. And in a presidential election year, when solidifying talking points takes precedence over problem-solving, it’s exceptionally unlikely. But preventing a Russian takeover of Ukraine, which important people on both sides of the Senate view as essential to preserving America’s global standing, was a strong motivator. Democrats also saw a political upside in engaging on legislation to arrest border chaos, an issue that was stinging President Biden’s popularity and threatening to drag down the many Senate Democratic incumbents up for reelection in 2024.

Sensitive deals like this only make it into law, though, if both sides can convince their respective parties of a win. And too many Republicans, led by Donald Trump, convinced themselves that a bill with Democratic political upside was zero-sum. Trump wanted to run on an overwhelmed border and a broken asylum process, and this deal was an impediment to that. The near-certain Republican nominee’s marching orders were spread far and wide.

Advertisement

Advertisement

“I had a popular commentator four weeks ago that I talked to that told me, flat out, before they knew any of the contents of the bill,” Lankford said in a Senate speech Wednesday afternoon, “that ‘if you try to move a bill that solves the border crisis during this presidential year, I will do whatever I can to destroy you. Because I do not want you to solve this during the presidential election.’”

Advertisement

“By the way,” Lankford added, “they have been faithful to their promise, and have done everything they can to destroy me in the past several weeks.”

Shortly after Lankford’s speech, most Republicans, along with a few progressive Senate Democrats, filibustered the border deal.

With that out of the way, though, the Senate began to see a way forward on Ukraine. Schumer proposed—and McConnell agreed—that the Senate should just take the border deal out of the package and pass the aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan on its own. While there was much rending of garments within the Senate Republican ranks on Wednesday about this, it’s the clearest path forward. And, yes, it would bring things back to square one.

Advertisement

Popular in News & Politics

  1. The Supreme Court Knows What It Must Do With Trump’s Immunity Ploy
  2. The Easy-to-Miss Detail at the Heart of Trump’s Big Court Defeat
  3. Donald Trump Is Asking the Supreme Court for the Bush v. Gore Treatment
  4. The One Way the Supreme Court Can Keep Trump on the Ballot and Still Maintain Its Credibility

Should that bill pass the Senate after an amendment or two in the coming days, it’s still unclear how it would navigate its way through the House. Democrats could offer to backstop Mike Johnson’s speakership should hardliners seek to oust him for allowing a vote on it; it could be folded into the (next) government funding bill in exchange for other concessions; members could seek to force a vote on it through a discharge petition.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Though the border bill crashed and burned in a spectacular, cynical fashion, going through that process was a necessary step towards moving Ukraine aid. It provided proof that Republicans did not want the best border security deal they could get out of a Democratic Senate and Democratic president. They wanted the political issue of border insecurity as a talking point on the campaign trail. Establishing that shaped the ground for a “deal” that has a flying chance. Democrats and more traditional Republicans could get Ukraine aid, while MAGA Republicans could keep the border alive as a campaign issue. If that reads as insane to you, well, of course it is. Take a look around.

Tweet Share Share Comment

QOSHE - Why the Border Deal Wasn’t a Complete Waste of Time - Jim Newell
menu_open
Columnists Actual . Favourites . Archive
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close
Aa Aa Aa
- A +

Why the Border Deal Wasn’t a Complete Waste of Time

22 33
08.02.2024
Tweet Share Share Comment

It would be tempting to describe the negotiation over the Senate’s border bill, which died this week, shortly after it was introduced, as having been a pointless waste of time. That would certainly be the view of frustrated staffers and reporters who spent long hours over the last few months working on it and covering it.

“It looks to me, and to most of our members, as if we have no real chance here to make a law,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday afternoon as he stuck a fork in it, following a couple of days of heated meetings in which Republicans groused about the border package that Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford—acting at McConnell’s behest—struck with Democrats.

Advertisement

But while it would’ve been nice if the proposal could have reached this outcome—instant death—on a more abbreviated timeline, this fruitless endeavor was still a necessary step towards resolving the battle that underlies it: Discovering the legislative path, if there still is one, towards getting additional military aid to Ukraine.

This saga goes back to the aftermath of the 2022 midterm elections.

Republicans took control of the House of Representatives by a far slimmer margin than they had projected, empowering a far-right faction that was always skeptical of arming Ukraine to hold disproportionate sway within the conference. Congressional leaders at the time, along with anyone who paid even vague attention to politics, could foresee the problems that Speaker Kevin McCarthy would have when he took the gavel. So, in Dec. 2022, Senate leaders and outgoing House Democratic leaders tucked as much Ukraine funding as they could into a government funding bill that would last through Sept. 2023.

........

© Slate


Get it on Google Play