Border securityHouse delays vote on “the toughest border security bill ever”
The House was supposed to vote on Wednsday on what Republicans have called “the toughest border security bill ever,” but the bill encountered harsh criticism from different sides of the GOP caucus. Some complained the measure does not address the pressing issue of immigration reform, while others complained it was the first step on slippery slope toward such reform. The border security bill, Secure Our Borders First Act (H.R. 399), sponsored by House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas), would impose harsh penalties for federal agencies that fail to meet certain requirements. One mandate aims for DHS to achieve “operational control,” or prevent illegal entry across the southern border, within five years. If DHS fails to achieve that objective, political appointees at the agency would be prohibited from traveling in government vehicles, receive reimbursement for nonessential travel, or receive pay increases or bonuses.
The House was supposed to vote on Wednesday on what Republicans have called “the toughest border security bill ever,” but the bill faced vociferous criticism from different sides of the GOP caucus. Some complained the measure does not address the pressing issue of immigration reform, while others complained it was the first step on slippery slope toward such reform. The border security bill, Secure Our Borders First Act (H.R. 399), sponsored by House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas), would impose harsh penalties for federal agencies that fail to meet certain requirements. Roll Call reports that one mandate aims for DHS to achieve “operational control,” or prevent illegal entry across the southern border, within five years. If DHS fails to achieve that objective, political appointees at the agency would be prohibited from traveling in government vehicles, receive reimbursement for nonessential travel, or receive pay increases or bonuses.
Republicans who tried to reach a consensus with Democrats on immigration in the previous Congress, said McCaul’s bill could help make the task more reachable this time around.
“I actually think this makes other pieces easier to vote for, if you’re comfortable that an adequate security piece is in place,” said Representative Tom Cole (R-Oklahoma). “I don’t think doing border security and stopping would be the appropriate thing to do when we know there are other areas where we can get some things done.” Cole admits that he is uncertain of how the border security bill fits in Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) larger immigration plan, but he believes discussions on the topic are occurring. “I think the speaker is very, very determined,” Cole said.
Some Republicans have urged McCaul to include references to immigration reform in his bill, saying this would guarantee further discussions on immigration. “I continue to have concerns about timing, as well as the sequence of the other bills that should be coming up as well,” said Representative Jeff Denham (R-California), who recently met with McCaul to review the border security bill. “I think there needs to be a commitment from our conference that we address all aspects of immigration.” Representative Mark Amodei (R-Nevada), who supports immigration reform, expressed similar sentiments. “I’ll be watching very, very carefully for, ‘You said you needed this first, so we got that first, now let’s talk about other (things),’” he said.
Republicans who do not favor current immigration reform proposals, and who have tried to block
