Tweet Share Share Comment

“That’s, like, parallel-universe shit,” a furious North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis exclaimed to reporters Thursday. “That didn’t happen.”

Tillis was referring to a report Wednesday night, from Punchbowl News, that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was backing away from a deal for enhanced border security with additional aid for Ukraine. The final product of those negotiations has supposedly been coming any minute now for about a week. McConnell, the Senate GOP’s most steadfast supporter of funding Ukraine’s defense against Russia, has been pushing the effort.

What threw Tillis and other McConnell allies into a fit about the reporting wasn’t just the idea that McConnell had turned, but that he had done so out of deference to Donald Trump. According to Punchbowl’s reporting, McConnell, during a Republican conference lunch on Wednesday, said that the “politics on this have changed,” and noted that Trump—whom he referred to as “the nominee”—is campaigning on fixing a broken border.

“We don’t want to do anything to undermine him,” McConnell reportedly said.

McConnell’s office didn’t say anything to deny the reporting. But other GOP senators suggested that his comments had been misinterpreted. He wasn’t throwing in the towel on the deal, which lead negotiators Sens. James Lankford, Chris Murphy, and Kyrsten Sinema say they’re putting the finishing touches on. And he wasn’t “bowing” to Trump, who has been hectoring senators and House members to reject anything short of “PERFECT.”

Advertisement

What Republicans didn’t deny, though, was that McConnell had explained how difficult the politics of the situation had become. And no one would contradict him on that.

Lankford, the poor soul tapped with negotiating the deal for Republicans, referred to McConnell’s remarks at the meeting as an “elephant-in-the-room conversation,” as in “everybody in the room knows this,” so McConnell was just saying it “out loud.”

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

So what, precisely, was the elephant in the room? The dirty politics of election-year policymaking, and why significant legislation is much more challenging in even-numbered years. Politicians have to choose, as the saying goes, whether they want the solution or the issue. Donald Trump, as ever, is more blunt than others in saying that he wants to run against Biden’s unpopular handling of border security, and a bill that markedly decreases border encounters would be a “win” for Biden, defanging the potency of Trump’s attacks. After his comfortable wins in Iowa and New Hampshire, Trump is firmly in control of the party’s presidential nomination. That makes it much harder to refuse his wishes.

Advertisement

“It is going to cause a lot of problems politically,” Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance told reporters on Thursday. “On the flip side, of course, all of us want to secure the border. We might have disagreements about how to get there.

“So I think,” Vance said of McConnell, “he was just acknowledging the quandary.”

The package has split Senate Republicans between their old-guard and MAGA factions, and another rule that’s especially pertinent in election years is that you don’t want to pursue issues that split your members. Typically, McConnell and Senate GOP leadership would never have even gotten into a negotiation with so many predictable red flags. (Keep in mind, too, that the policy issue here is immigration, on which there hasn’t been a meaningful bipartisan deal in a long, long time.) What’s kept McConnell going on this treacherous turf was the need to get cash to Ukraine—which could fall, and quickly, if the American military is cut off.

Advertisement

Advertisement

“If he’s going to get any money to Ukraine, which he’s for, he’s going to have to get the border done,” Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville said of McConnell’s situation. When a reporter asked Lankford on Thursday whether there was a viable path for Ukraine aid without a border deal, Lankford said, simply, “No.”

Advertisement

Chris Murphy, the top Senate Democrat in the border negotiations, said Thursday that Senate Republicans would need to decide “in the next 24 hours as to whether they actually want to get something done,” or whether they want to keep the border a “mess” for political reasons.

“Republicans have made it very clear they aren’t willing to support Ukraine aid without a border package,” Murphy said. “We have negotiated a border policy package. We did what Republicans asked us to do. And now they seem to be having a hard time actually closing the deal.

Advertisement

“What is very scary to some Republicans,” he continued, “is that the deal we have reached will actually fix a big part of the problem. And I know for Donald Trump and some Republicans, it’s not in their best interest for there to be policy changes that actually fix the broken asylum system or give the president new tools to better manage the border.”

Advertisement

Advertisement

Negotiators are keeping details of the would-be deal close to the chest. That alone has been a source of consternation to a lot of Senate Republicans (or so they say).

“So, I hear from you guys [the media] that there’s a trigger of 5,000 people a day, and that’s when you can trigger the [expedited removal] authority,” Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley told reporters of one reported provision in the deal. “So I say, ‘I don’t like the sound of that.’ And then I’m told by our leadership, ‘Well, that’s not actually how it’s written.’ So I say, ‘How is it written?’ ‘Well, wait for the text.’ ” (Hawley said he could show reporters text messages of his exchanges with leadership as proof, but he demurred when taken up on that offer.)

Advertisement

An argument that supporters of the package have been making to Republicans is that they wouldn’t be undermining Trump—they’d be empowering him by putting in place statutory tools on border security that he could employ on Day 1 if elected president. (Keeping expedited removal tools out of Trump’s hands, it should be said, is also the go-to argument progressives have been making to protest the bill from the left.)

Advertisement

“If President Trump’s the nominee, I want him to be the president next year,” Tillis told reporters. “And I want us to succeed in this Congress to provide the tools he was asking for six years ago.”

Related From Slate

Alexander Sammon

This Gelato and Liquor Tycoon Lost Big to Biden in New Hampshire. He’s “Ready to Keep This Baby Going.”

Read More

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who did not take kindly to early reports of the to-be-determined deal, said that this was only proponents’ latest argument in a shifting series of them.

Advertisement

Popular in News & Politics

  1. What’s Going On With Brett Kavanaugh?
  2. Biden Can Beat Trump. This Is What He Needs to Do Right Now.
  3. The 2024 General Election Is Already Underway. God Help Us.
  4. The Most Ridiculous Argument for Keeping Trump on the Ballot

“Now, if that’s the reported justification, the fact that Trump himself has said he doesn’t need these changes should carry a lot of weight,” Cruz told reporters. “And we do know that, without one word of this bill being enacted, Trump was able to produce incredible success in securing the border.”

Since the bill has a “zero percent chance of passing the House,” he surmised, “the only purpose” of the deal would be “to give political cover to Democrats who pretend they want to secure the border.”

A border deal linked with Ukraine aid was never going to be an easy thing to get through. But Trump’s emergence as the more-or-less presumptive nominee and his political interests have made it that much harder for Republicans to pull together a supportive whip count. It doesn’t matter which details are switched in the eleventh hour: The deal would be very, very unlikely to meet Trump’s standard of “PERFECT ON THE BORDER.”

“But who knows?” Hawley, who will never, ever in his life vote for a bipartisan compromise on border policy, told reporters: “Maybe we’ll see the text tomorrow and it will be, like, a thing of beauty.”

Tweet Share Share Comment

QOSHE - Trump Has Thrown a Wrench Into Mitch McConnell’s Immigration Deal - 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 +

Trump Has Thrown a Wrench Into Mitch McConnell’s Immigration Deal

7 6
26.01.2024
Tweet Share Share Comment

“That’s, like, parallel-universe shit,” a furious North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis exclaimed to reporters Thursday. “That didn’t happen.”

Tillis was referring to a report Wednesday night, from Punchbowl News, that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was backing away from a deal for enhanced border security with additional aid for Ukraine. The final product of those negotiations has supposedly been coming any minute now for about a week. McConnell, the Senate GOP’s most steadfast supporter of funding Ukraine’s defense against Russia, has been pushing the effort.

What threw Tillis and other McConnell allies into a fit about the reporting wasn’t just the idea that McConnell had turned, but that he had done so out of deference to Donald Trump. According to Punchbowl’s reporting, McConnell, during a Republican conference lunch on Wednesday, said that the “politics on this have changed,” and noted that Trump—whom he referred to as “the nominee”—is campaigning on fixing a broken border.

“We don’t want to do anything to undermine him,” McConnell reportedly said.

McConnell’s office didn’t say anything to deny the reporting. But other GOP senators suggested that his comments had been misinterpreted. He wasn’t throwing in the towel on the deal, which lead negotiators Sens. James Lankford, Chris Murphy, and Kyrsten Sinema say they’re putting the finishing touches on. And he wasn’t “bowing” to Trump, who has been hectoring senators and House members to reject anything short of “PERFECT.”

Advertisement

What Republicans didn’t deny, though, was that McConnell had explained how difficult the politics of the situation had become. And no one would contradict him on that.

Lankford, the poor soul tapped with negotiating the deal for Republicans, referred to McConnell’s remarks at the meeting as an “elephant-in-the-room conversation,” as in “everybody in the room knows this,” so McConnell was just saying it “out loud.”

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

So what, precisely,........

© Slate


Get it on Google Play