House Democrats reject GOP deal on cutting ICE funding
house Democrats are preparing to oppose a bipartisan homeland security funding bill set for a Thursday vote, saying concessions to curb ICE’s operations don’t go far enough. Leadership sources say House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries will vote against the DHS bill while supporting three other appropriations measures; Democratic caucus Chair Pete Aguilar and others plan to oppose unless more substantive changes are made. Republicans on the Appropriations Committee cut $115 million from ICE, pared 5,500 detention beds, and set aside $20 million for body cameras, steps GOP leaders call necessary to reach a deal and avoid a government shutdown. Democrats push for larger cuts, stricter accountability, and protections against wrongful deportations-some progressives even call to abolish ICE-while appropriations ranking member Rosa DeLauro warns that blocking the bill would harm TSA, FEMA, the Coast Guard, and other homeland-security functions.The measure will face a Rules Committee vote first; GOP leaders, including Speaker Mike Johnson, express confidence it can pass and urge Democrats not to use the DHS bill to imperil broader security funding.
‘Doesn’t do enough’: House Democrats reject GOP deal on cutting ICE funding
House Democratic leaders are planning to oppose a bipartisan homeland security funding bill set for a vote this week, even after Republicans agreed to cut funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
A source familiar with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries’s (D-NY) thinking confirmed to the Washington Examiner that he will vote no on the bill but will vote yes on the three other appropriations bills involving defense, labor, transportation, and other related agencies.
Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar (D-CA) is also planning to oppose the bill; other members of the Democratic leadership said they would as well unless Republicans agreed to more “substantive changes” to ICE.
“I imagine members will vote their districts, and they will judge the bill on the substance.… But our encouragement to our colleagues is that this bill doesn’t do enough,” said Aguilar. “We shared our feelings with the caucus. I look forward to the vote tomorrow.”
Aguilar added that it was clear there “isn’t a huge appetite of support” for the bill within the Democratic caucus.
Democratic opposition comes even after Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee agreed to cut $115 million from ICE operations. GOP lawmakers also signed off on reducing the number of detention beds in migrant holding facilities by 5,500 and agreed to earmark $20 million to equip ICE agents with body cameras.
House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole (R-OK) said the compromise was needed to “get a deal” and avoid another government shutdown.
“Nobody gets everything they want. If [Democrats] got to write this bill by [themselves], it’d be a very different bill,” Cole said. “So we’ve got to find ways to work together.”
House Democrats say the concessions don’t go far enough, however.
“I will not vote to give a single cent to Trump’s ICE,” Rep. Juan Vargas (D-CA) wrote on X. “No blank checks for a rogue agency that terrorizes our communities, escalates violence, and denies people their constitutional rights.”
Instead of just trimming ICE funding and requiring agents to wear body cameras, Democrats want larger cuts and prohibitions on the deportation of U.S citizens. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), the ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee, said the frustration was understandable but misplaced.
“I understand that many of my Democratic colleagues may be dissatisfied with any bill that funds ICE. I share their frustration with the out-of-control agency,” she said. “The Homeland Security funding bill is more than just ICE. If we allow a lapse in funding, [Transportation Security Administration] agents will be forced to work without pay, [Federal Emergency Management Association] assistance could be delayed, and the U.S. Coast Guard will be adversely affected.”
Despite their frustration, rank-and-file Democrats are not pointing fingers at DeLauro or other appropriators for negotiating the deal.
Several Democrats, including Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), even expressed their appreciation for the appropriators, but said they couldn’t support the bill “without real accountability and guardrails.” What those guardrails look like has yet to be determined.
Some Democrats, including New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, have called for abolishing ICE. Others, such as Aguilar, say Congress must reform the “lawless agency” either through legislation or the appropriations process.
House Republicans have scheduled the homeland security funding bill vote for Thursday, along with three other appropriation bills. The homeland security bill is slated for a lone vote, meaning lawmakers will be able to voice their opposition without tanking funding for other government agencies.
The first roadblock for the GOP will be a vote within the House Rules Committee to send the funding bill to the floor. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC), who sits on the panel, said he’ll be voting for the rule and for final passage “unless something changes.” He noted that he has no issue with the cuts to ICE, but the committee will take up a handful of amendments making changes to funding and policy, though he wouldn’t get into specifics.
GOP PLAYS BALL WITH DEMOCRATS ON ICE FUNDING, BODY CAMERAS FOR AGENTS
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) expressed optimism that the bill will pass.
“If you have a problem with ICE, many of them do, of course, irrationally, you should not take down the appropriations bill because there’s all these other areas of homeland security that are essential,” Johnson said at the GOP weekly presser, pointing to DeLauro’s statement. “This is not a game. We can’t do a [continuing resolution] on homeland security … I think you should listen to the reasonable Democrats who helped put these bills together, because they understand the necessity of protecting the homeland right now.”
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
