SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
U.S. Border Patrol Agents at Border Field State Park in Imperial Beach watch over personnel that are reinforcing the border wall with concertina wire. (Photo: Mani Albrecht/U.S. Border Patrol/Flickr)
Democrats Urged to Reject $1.375 Billion for Trump Border Wall in Compromise Spending Bill
"It's time to stand up for border communities."
Dec 15, 2019
Immigrant rights advocates on Monday denounced Democrats for reportedly agreeing to $1.375 billion in funding for President Donald Trump's border wall obsession and called on lawmakers to speak out against the agreement.
Rep. Filemon Vela (D-Texas) called for fellow members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to completely reject funding the wall.
"Otherwise, why even exist?" the congressman tweeted. "It's time to stand up for border communities!"
The spending bill was agreed to last week after negotiations between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, House Appropriations Chairwoman Rep. Nita M. Lowey (D-N.Y.), and Senate Appropriations Chairman Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.).
According to Politico, the border wall funding represents a compromise of sorts:
Money for the U.S.-Mexico barrier will stay static during the current fiscal year, at about $1.4 billion, rather than the president's request for $8.6 billion. Budgets for the nation's two immigration enforcement agencies--Customs and Border Protection, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement--are also largely flat-lined.
Journalist David Dayen, noting that Trump can easily find more funding for the wall by moving money around, was nonetheless confused by Democrats giving the president a win.
"What's the rationale to make things easier on Trump here?" wondered Dayen.
Though the border wall spending is far less than the $5 billion the president wanted, opponents of Trump's immigration policies took issue with funding the wall at all.
News of the spending bill's border wall provision provoked groans from progressives on social media.
"Hell of an opposition party Trump has to face," journalist James Fredrik said sarcastically.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Immigrant rights advocates on Monday denounced Democrats for reportedly agreeing to $1.375 billion in funding for President Donald Trump's border wall obsession and called on lawmakers to speak out against the agreement.
Rep. Filemon Vela (D-Texas) called for fellow members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to completely reject funding the wall.
"Otherwise, why even exist?" the congressman tweeted. "It's time to stand up for border communities!"
The spending bill was agreed to last week after negotiations between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, House Appropriations Chairwoman Rep. Nita M. Lowey (D-N.Y.), and Senate Appropriations Chairman Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.).
According to Politico, the border wall funding represents a compromise of sorts:
Money for the U.S.-Mexico barrier will stay static during the current fiscal year, at about $1.4 billion, rather than the president's request for $8.6 billion. Budgets for the nation's two immigration enforcement agencies--Customs and Border Protection, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement--are also largely flat-lined.
Journalist David Dayen, noting that Trump can easily find more funding for the wall by moving money around, was nonetheless confused by Democrats giving the president a win.
"What's the rationale to make things easier on Trump here?" wondered Dayen.
Though the border wall spending is far less than the $5 billion the president wanted, opponents of Trump's immigration policies took issue with funding the wall at all.
News of the spending bill's border wall provision provoked groans from progressives on social media.
"Hell of an opposition party Trump has to face," journalist James Fredrik said sarcastically.
Immigrant rights advocates on Monday denounced Democrats for reportedly agreeing to $1.375 billion in funding for President Donald Trump's border wall obsession and called on lawmakers to speak out against the agreement.
Rep. Filemon Vela (D-Texas) called for fellow members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to completely reject funding the wall.
"Otherwise, why even exist?" the congressman tweeted. "It's time to stand up for border communities!"
The spending bill was agreed to last week after negotiations between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, House Appropriations Chairwoman Rep. Nita M. Lowey (D-N.Y.), and Senate Appropriations Chairman Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.).
According to Politico, the border wall funding represents a compromise of sorts:
Money for the U.S.-Mexico barrier will stay static during the current fiscal year, at about $1.4 billion, rather than the president's request for $8.6 billion. Budgets for the nation's two immigration enforcement agencies--Customs and Border Protection, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement--are also largely flat-lined.
Journalist David Dayen, noting that Trump can easily find more funding for the wall by moving money around, was nonetheless confused by Democrats giving the president a win.
"What's the rationale to make things easier on Trump here?" wondered Dayen.
Though the border wall spending is far less than the $5 billion the president wanted, opponents of Trump's immigration policies took issue with funding the wall at all.
News of the spending bill's border wall provision provoked groans from progressives on social media.
"Hell of an opposition party Trump has to face," journalist James Fredrik said sarcastically.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.