Republicans go to filibuster-proof bill to break Democrats’ roadblocks, fund Trump priorities

Republicans hope to deliver a one-two legislative punch before the midterm elections this fall by using a filibuster-proof process to steamroll Democrats who have obstructed much of President Trump’s legislative agenda.

First up will be a measure to boost funding for immigration enforcement. Democrats continue to filibuster annual appropriations for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and much of Customs and Border Protection.

Mr. Trump has said he wants that bill on his desk by June 1. Republicans should be able to deliver if they can keep the measure focused on funding the administration’s deportation agenda.

“Wouldn’t you hate to be the Republican that went home and said, ‘I voted against giving money to ICE and to Border Patrol?’” said Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham.

Speaking at an event in his home state of South Carolina last week, Mr. Graham said he wants to pass that bill quickly and then use the filibuster-proof budget reconciliation process again this fall to codify more of Mr. Trump’s priorities.

“That’s going to be about going after fraud,” Mr. Graham said of the second bill. “It’s going to be about voter integrity, a down payment on the SAVE [America] Act.”

Republicans also have discussed including defense funding in the second package.

The fiscal 2027 budget proposal Mr. Trump sent to Congress last week envisions a $1.5 trillion defense budget, including $350 billion in mandatory funding that Republicans can use the budget reconciliation process to pass.

Advertisement Advertisement

Pursuing a second, larger reconciliation package close to the election is a major gamble given Republicans’ narrow margins in both chambers.

“It’s going to have to be a well-coordinated exercise,” House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, Texas Republican, told The Washington Times. “You need all the incentives and all the motivating factors in play to get the vote.”

He said the SAVE America Act, which would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and a photo ID to cast a ballot, is a unifying measure for Republicans that should serve as an incentive, if it can survive the process.

The Senate rules for budget reconciliation, which exempt the process from the filibuster, also require that any policy changes have more than a “merely incidental” budgetary impact.

The SAVE America Act likely would not meet that requirement, but Mr. Arrington argued that it could be rewritten to create a significant budget impact.

Advertisement Advertisement

“I think there are ways to put money behind [it] and a way to incentivize states to clean up their voter rolls, to implement voter ID initiatives,” he said.

Mr. Graham also floated ideas for restructuring SAVE America Act provisions to meet the requirements of reconciliation.

“If you’re not willing to purge your voter rolls, then maybe some federal grants won’t come your way,” he said, suggesting that other election provisions could be drafted to “incentivize the right thing and punish the wrong thing.”

The budget committee chairmen are also aligned in their interest in using reconciliation to crack down on fraud and prevent theft in government benefit programs, as occurred in several high-profile cases in Minnesota.

Advertisement Advertisement

“How many dollars do you think have gone out the door based on just made-up people?” Mr. Graham said. “All they require is if you send the bill, you don’t even have to list the people who got SNAP benefits. That’s how Minnesota happened.”

Mr. Arrington views the anti-fraud effort as key to winning over fiscal conservatives who will want to offset much of the new spending on defense or the SAVE America Act.

“The centerpiece of our offsets and reforms should be on ridding the government of what GAO says is upwards of $500 billion a year in fraud, which is, by the way, more than the entire economic output of Denmark,” he said in reference to the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office.

Republicans used their last reconciliation bill, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, to add work requirements to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and ensure benefits would not go to illegal immigrants. Mr. Arrington said Republicans should do the same for other government programs.

Advertisement Advertisement

“There are 78 other means-tested programs that should have the same program integrity measures,” he said, and the collective savings could exceed $1 trillion.

Republican leaders have at times sent conflicting messages about the viability of using budget reconciliation a second or even a third time this Congress, after last year’s laborious effort to pass the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, South Dakota Republican, has said repeatedly that there must be a good reason that unifies the party around the effort. Last year, it was the Republicans’ desire to permanently extend expiring tax cuts from Mr. Trump’s first term.

After months of indifference, Mr. Thune now says a second reconciliation bill is needed to fund ICE and CBP through the remainder of Mr. Trump’s term because Democrats are refusing to support any money for immigration enforcement.

Advertisement Advertisement

He hopes rank-and-file Republicans will resist the urge to add provisions that could implicate multiple committees of jurisdiction and complicate the process.

“Our theory of the case behind all this was to keep that thing as narrow and focused as possible,” he said. “And that maximizes, I think, the speed at which we can do it and the support for it.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson, Louisiana Republican, has been pushing for a second sizable reconciliation package for months despite doubt from others in his conference.

When the Senate first pitched a two-track plan to fund most Homeland Security Department agencies through regular appropriations and ICE and CBP through reconciliation, Mr. Johnson suddenly changed his tune.

He called the reconciliation effort “a very difficult task” and “a high-risk gamble.”

That likely stems from House Republicans’ distrust of the Senate. Mr. Johnson has since jumped on board with the two-track funding plan, at Mr. Trump’s urging, but a majority of his conference is pushing for a reordering of the two tracks.

“I’m fine with the two-track approach, as long as the first approach that we make is funding ICE and CBP,” Rep. Beth Van Duyne, Texas Republican, said on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures.”

The Senate has passed a bill to fund the rest of the Homeland Security Department by voice vote, but the House lacks consensus to follow suit. That’s partly why House Republicans want to be on record funding ICE and CBP first.

“Just expecting us to all put our names on a vote that would fund out to a zero level ICE and CBP after the Senate just had to do it by a voice vote — not one single senator is on the record — I don’t think that’s right,” Ms. Van Duyne said.

• Lindsey McPherson can be reached at lmcpherson@washingtontimes.com.