The bipartisan border deal the Senate spent months working on appears to be all but dead after former President Donald Trump whipped Republicans against it, fearful he would lose one of his most potent campaign issues. This leaves Senate Republicans in the position of trying to come up with reasons why they oppose it.
On the Senate floor Thursday evening, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) attempted to do so in an argument with Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), one of the chief negotiators of the deal, reported The Hill's Alex Bolton.
ALSO READ: Alina Habba is persona non grata at her Pennsylvania law school
"We've done a half-assed job here trying to secure the border," Graham told Sinema. "No, no, no. This has not been a real effort to find border security in a bipartisan way." He went on to complain that Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) wouldn't allow any amendments to the bill.
But Graham's complaints here are dishonest, revealed Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), another one of the architects of the bill — because Graham had direct input in its contents throughout the process.
"His top staff were in the room when we negotiated the bill," Murphy posted on X. "We negotiated key provisions directly with him."
The border proposal, which was tied to defense aid for Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan, was far more conservative than previous bipartisan immigration reform plans. It would require the border be shut down to migrants when daily encounters exceed 5,000, tighten the standards for asylum, and streamline the process to remove migrants who don't qualify for asylum. In return, the bill would raise caps on visas, provide legal representation to unaccompanied migrant children, and make it easier for migrants who pass initial asylum screenings to get work permits.
Leave a Comment
Related Post