Tweet Share Share Comment

“The sun may be shining outside, but today is a gloomy day here in the United States Senate,” the chamber’s majority leader, New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, said from the floor on Tuesday.

Schumer was, in the immediate sense, referring to the status of the so-called national security supplementary package that members of both parties had written together—a bill that would provide military aid to Ukraine and Israel, fund the hiring of new border security personnel, and give the executive branch more discretion to turn away migrants seeking asylum in the U.S. The bill looks unlikely to pass, as Schumer noted.

But he was also referring more broadly to what its impending failure says about the existential condition of the Senate. As Schumer observed, the most noteworthy pieces of the supplemental bill are its immigration-related provisions, which had been “fervently demanded” by the GOP in November and were added to the legislation, over the course of two-plus months, by Republican Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford, who had been deputized by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Republican senators like Nebraska’s Deb Fischer, Schumer noted, had argued that it would be “absurd” to consider Israel or Ukraine’s security without also addressing border security.

Now, however, the Republican caucus is determined to vote against the measures it insisted on, which have been endorsed by the Wall Street Journal’s conservative editorial board and a union that represents border patrol agents. The reason for this is that Donald Trump wrote on social media on Jan. 25 that Republicans shouldn’t give Democrats a political “gift” by helping pass a bill intended to address an issue of such significant public concern. (At that time, Republican North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis said that neglecting border security for political reasons would be “immoral.” He now opposes the bill.)

Advertisement

This has left Democrats flat-footed. In years past, attempts to pass immigration legislation have died due to grassroots Republican backlash against the progressive measures included to secure Democratic support. But this bill didn’t have progressive measures in it. Democrats had agreed to restrictions on immigration in order to secure funding for national defense.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

The party was prepared to rally public opinion behind the bill; President Joe Biden was scheduled to speak about it from the White House on Tuesday at 11:45 a.m., and Schumer said he was prepared to set aside Senate floor time to consider potential changes to the legislation. But he had realized by Tuesday morning that this was pointless. “It is my hope, but not my expectation, that my friends across the aisle will resist the former president’s exhortation,” he said.

Advertisement

Related From Slate

Ben Mathis-Lilley

Wait, Republicans Are Impeaching Whom With the What Now?

Read More

Popular in News & Politics

  1. Fani Willis Admitted to the Affair. Now What?
  2. A Retired MLB Player’s Hilarious, Substance-Free Run for Senate as a Republican
  3. The Supreme Court Can’t Let Fear of Trump Supporters Force Its Hand
  4. The Supreme Court Knows What It Must Do With Trump’s Immunity Ploy

Such is the challenge of playing a game in which the two sides don’t agree on what constitutes winning, or even whether a game is being played. (The Republican senators and staffers who put months of work into this bill might have appreciated an earlier heads-up about what was eventually going to happen to it.) Trump may be under the impression that he’s committing an act of strategic sabotage for which Biden will be blamed by voters—but Republicans and Democrats also don’t live in a shared reality about the will of the electorate, either. We got a reminder of that elsewhere in Washington on Tuesday, as an appeals court ruled against Trump in his effort to avoid being prosecuted over his refusal to accept voting results in 2020.

Biden didn’t come out at 11:45. The C-SPAN page prepared to broadcast his remarks changed its timestamp to noon, then to 12:30 p.m. At 1 p.m., the camera was on, but the room was empty, a lone lectern placed in front of a portrait of Abraham Lincoln. What was there to say?

Tweet Share Share Comment

QOSHE - The Border Bill’s Failure Says a Lot About the Existential Condition of the Senate - Ben Mathis-Lilley
menu_open
Columnists Actual . Favourites . Archive
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close
Aa Aa Aa
- A +

The Border Bill’s Failure Says a Lot About the Existential Condition of the Senate

9 16
07.02.2024
Tweet Share Share Comment

“The sun may be shining outside, but today is a gloomy day here in the United States Senate,” the chamber’s majority leader, New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, said from the floor on Tuesday.

Schumer was, in the immediate sense, referring to the status of the so-called national security supplementary package that members of both parties had written together—a bill that would provide military aid to Ukraine and Israel, fund the hiring of new border security personnel, and give the executive branch more discretion to turn away migrants seeking asylum in the U.S. The bill looks unlikely to pass, as Schumer noted.

But he was also referring more broadly to what its impending failure says about the existential condition of the Senate. As Schumer observed, the most noteworthy pieces of the supplemental bill are its immigration-related provisions, which had been “fervently demanded” by the GOP in November and were added to the legislation, over the course of two-plus months, by Republican Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford, who had been deputized by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Republican senators like........

© Slate


Get it on Google Play