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."
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 are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. US voters have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
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.