Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) is adamant that plans to fund the U.S. government and avoid a partial government shutdown must include measure to secure the U.S. southern border.
“Across the nation, whether it’s a conservative area, a more liberal area, blue mayors, everyone’s crying for the border to be shut down,” Mr. Ogles told NTD’s “Capitol Report.”
Several Republicans have called for increased border security as a key component in the budget going forward, as the latest round of government funding is set to run out on Jan. 19.
This week, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) announced that he had reached a deal with Senate Democrats and the White House on a topline spending figure of $1.59 trillion for the fiscal year. However, some Republicans have expressed dissatisfaction with the tentative budget agreement, and 13 Republicans—including Mr. Ogles— voted to block a procedural vote on Wednesday in protest of the budget deal.
“There was a vote that was just had, I was one of those that shut down the House floor to make sure that we send a message to the speaker that any spending deal has to include securing our border,” Mr. Ogles told NTD.
Republicans in both the House and the Senate have already attached their demands for border security to a more than $100 billion supplemental spending request submitted by President Joe Biden in the fall. The president’s supplemental spending proposal linked several billion in new border and immigration funding to his other spending priorities, like continuing to fund Ukraine in its ongoing war with Russia.
Republicans have argued that the new spending in President Biden’s supplemental request, to hire more border and immigration personnel, is of little use for addressing the existing strain on the U.S. immigration system. The Republican lawmakers have instead argued that the United States should resume construction on a border wall, and that Congress should pass—and the Biden administration should approve—more stringent immigration enforcement policies that limit eligibility for illegal border crossers to request asylum or to grant temporary U.S. entry.
Partial Government Shutdown Looms
Republican calls to now attach border security demands to a broader U.S. government budget add a new layer of complexity to negotiations as the deadline looms to pass a budget. Funding for the government is set to run out on Jan. 19, after which the government goes into a state of partial shutdown.
Some Republican lawmakers have already indicated they don’t mind risking a partial shutdown to win concessions on their border demands.
“We must make funding for federal government operations contingent on the President signing H.R. 2, or its functional equivalent, into law and stopping the flow across our border,” Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) wrote in a letter to colleagues last week, referring to a House bill that encompasses much of the Republican Party’s border security demands.
“Shut down the border or shut down the government,” Rep. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) wrote in a social media post this week.
For now, Mr. Ogles said he hopes to see the government funded, but argued that a partial government shutdown is not as scary as it sounds.
“Eighty-five percent of the budget is on autopilot. And so let’s be honest, if the government shut down, they’re not wasting taxpayer money. We’ve got $34—almost $35 trillion in debt. Now, I would argue a government shutdown from a spending perspective is probably a good thing. But that being said, I get it. People don’t want to shut down. They don’t want the inconveniences that might come from it,” he said.
“But you know, I think it’s a scare tactic that is thrown out there to scare our seniors or veterans who think they may not get their benefits, but they will. They will get their benefits, and so anyone who says otherwise is being dishonest.”
If Congress is not able to reach a deal on funding for the entire fiscal year before Jan. 19, they may instead opt for a short-term funding measure, known as a continuing resolution (CR).
Congress twice passed continuing resolutions in the fall as the Republican House majority clashed with the Democrat-controlled Senate and White House. Many Republicans voted against the two CRs, describing them as “clean” CRs because the measures simply extended existing government funding without policy outcomes or spending reductions sought by conservatives.
Mr. Ogles said he’s principally against funding the government through CRs, but would be willing to support such funding measures under certain conditions.
“I’m a ‘No CR’ guy, but if in that process we got real border security, than I’m willing to have that conversation,” he said.
Democrats Won’t Accept ‘Poison Pills’
Republican calls to pass H.R. 2 or equivalent border security measures that fund border wall construction and restrict the asylum system have been a nonstarter with Democrats over months of negotiations.
Democratic Party leaders have been quick to accept the tentative spending agreement they’d reached with Mr. Johnson this week. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) have endorsed the topline spending numbers in a joint statement this week, and said they’d made clear to their Republican counterpart that their side of the aisle “will not support including poison pill policy changes.”
The Biden administration has also urged Congress to move ahead with the tentative budget framework this week. President Biden said the proposal “moves us one step closer to preventing a needless government shutdown and protecting important national priorities.”
“Now, congressional Republicans must do their job, stop threatening to shut down the government, and fulfill their basic responsibility to fund critical domestic and national security priorities, including my supplemental request,” the president added. “It’s time for them to act.”