WASHINGTON — The Senate began voting Thursday on a $70 billion bill to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol through the end of President Donald Trump’s term.
Republicans plan to pass the bill without any Democratic support. But first, they’ll have to endure a “vote-a-rama” during which senators from either party can offer amendments, which Democrats will use to make Republicans take painful votes.
There were some early signs of trouble as the first Democratic amendment was held open by GOP leaders for three hours, followed by multiple votes in which various factions of Republican senators broke with Trump’s priorities and opposed the $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund and his White House ballroom.
The amendment by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., sought to ban the Justice Department from creating the “weaponization” pot of money. Democrats and some Republicans see it as a “slush fund” to funnel taxpayer money to pay Jan. 6 rioters and other Trump allies.
It failed 49-50, but three Republicans voted with Democrats in support of it: Susan Collins of Maine, Jon Husted of Ohio and Dan Sullivan of Alaska. All face tough 2026 re-election bids.
The contentious issue forced Republicans to abandon plans to take up the bill two weeks ago. But problems have lingered as the Trump administration gives mixed signals about the fund.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche testified before Congress on Tuesday that the administration is “not moving forward with the fund.” But Trump said he’s not ready to do away with it yet. “The weaponization fund, as far as I’m concerned, was a beautiful thing,” the president told reporters Wednesday. “I love it. I think it’s so important.”
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., forced a vote on an amendment to redirect the $1.8 billion to an anti-fraud unit. A dozen Republicans voted with him, including John Cornyn of Texas and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, who were recently defeated in primaries by Trump-backed opponents.
“When you’re explaining, you’re losing. There’s no way to explain the $1.776 [billion] fund. So the only way you can explain it is explain that you got rid of it. It’s that simple,” said Tillis, who is retiring at the end of this term.
“I think that the Republicans should do the stump speech test on this issue, particularly the ones who are in cycle. ‘I stand solidly behind an administration that wants to potentially provide compensation to people who assaulted Capitol Police officers. I stand fully behind that.’ Test that on the stump and see how it works out for you,” he added.
The Tillis amendment failed 15-84 as most Democrats objected, saying the money should be withheld, not redirected.
Cassidy, meanwhile, signed on to an amicus brief with Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., laying out a detailed argument against the constitutionality of the fund and calling it “an immediate and dire threat to our constitutional order and the authority of Congress.”
By early evening, there was still chatter about the need to add some provision to the bill to shut down or limit the anti-weaponization fund, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, warning that failure to do so may scuttle the bill in the end.
“If it doesn’t limit it, if it still is viewed that there could be an opportunity for the department or the president to gain access to a fund that has some of the same contours that we’re dealing with, as it was presented to us, I think you, you lose, you lose this vote on final,” Murkowski told NBC News. “There’s enough people who really have great, grave concerns about the fund.”
Another amendment, by Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., sought to prohibit funding for Trump’s ballroom — either federal funds or private donations, which Trump said he’s relying on — without approval from Congress. Seven Republicans voted for it — including Collins, Husted and Sullivan. It got 53 votes but fell short of the 60 needed to get adopted.
Democrats insist they won’t let up on the anti-weaponization fund.
“Trump’s slush fund is anything but beautiful — it’s heinous, and it won’t die until we permanently ban it by law. Not by language, not by verbal promises, which can just evaporate, but by law,” Schumer said Thursday. “With the whole country watching, Republicans will have to choose: either support the slush fund or ban it. They can come up with 10 excuses. It’s a yes or no: support the slush fund or ban it.”
Schumer vowed that Democrats would also force votes on undoing a provision in Trump’s settlement with the IRS that prohibits the agency from auditing him or his family in the future.
Other Republicans say they trust Blanche that the administration won’t try to revive the weaponization fund.
Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., said Thursday that she would “probably not” support an amendment to bar it “because the administration has already done away with it, so there’s no sense beating a dead horse.”
It’s a puzzle for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., whose goal is to keep at least 50 out of the 53 Republican senators on board for an ICE and the Border Patrol funding bill that can pass and get Trump’s signature.
“It’s a simple bill,” Thune said. “It will do nothing more than fund Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement for the next three years. And why are we doing this bill? ... Because Democrats have refused to fund border security or immigration law enforcement.”
Democrats have said they will not fund ICE or the Border Patrol unless Republicans agree to new limits on the agencies after officers killed two Americans in Minnesota, Renee Good and Alex Pretti. The two parties have been unable to agree on reforms.
The House is expected to vote on the bill after it passes the Senate, although it’s unclear when that would occur.
