Senate Republicans moved Tuesday to advance a budget plan aimed at funding immigration enforcement operations through the remainder of President Donald Trump’s term, according to reports late Tuesday.
The effort begins with the budget reconciliation process, a legislative mechanism that allows the Senate to pass certain fiscal measures with a simple majority, bypassing the filibuster. The proposal is intended to provide funding for agencies including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Border Patrol over the next several years.
The initial vote sets up a series of amendment votes in the Senate before the budget framework is sent to the House for consideration.
The approach follows a prolonged standoff over funding for the Department of Homeland Security, as Democrats have sought additional policy changes and oversight measures tied to immigration enforcement before agreeing to funding, while Republicans have moved forward using reconciliation to advance the proposal without Democratic support.
“Republicans are doing something that must be done quickly, and that our Democrat colleagues are trying to prevent us from doing,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who drafted the resolution. “That something is simple: fully fund Border Patrol and ICE at a time of great threat to the United States.”
Republicans previously released a budget resolution that will guide their effort to fund immigration enforcement, directing both the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee to allocate up to $70 billion each.
While that framework allows for as much as $140 billion in spending, GOP lawmakers have indicated they expect the final package to total between $70 billion and $80 billion, giving the committees broad flexibility as they draft the legislation.
Senate Democrats have criticized the proposal, arguing the funding could instead be directed toward domestic priorities such as healthcare, housing, and energy costs, including concerns tied to rising gas prices – none of which they addressed during former President Joe Biden’s four-year term, which was marked by hyperinflation.
Republicans said turning to the party-line budget reconciliation process was not their preferred approach but argued it became necessary after Democrats declined to support funding for agencies such as ICE and CBP, Fox News noted.
The move has raised concerns among some lawmakers about its broader implications, including whether relying on reconciliation for major funding priorities could set a precedent for how Congress handles future government funding decisions.
“I don’t see any way, in a Trump administration, that they’re gonna come to the table and fund those two agencies,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said, addressing that concern, which may actually be unfounded.
In total since 1985, Congress has passed 27 reconciliation bills. Twenty-three of the bills were signed by the president and enacted. Four of the reconciliation bills passed both chambers of Congress but were vetoed by the President, according to Ballotpedia.
“We tried to avoid this. But at some point, we recognized that they’re just not gonna get to ‘yes,’” Thune said. “And that was pretty clear after spending weeks trying to negotiate with them.”
While front-line DHS agents are receiving pay, many of the agency’s support personnel and contractors have not been paid for months, thanks to Democrats refusing to support bills to do fund those personnel and operations.
Republicans still have a significant journey ahead before they can advance the budget resolution to the House, and even more before the final version reaches Trump’s desk. He has stated that the GOP must deliver the package no later than June 1.
Not all Republicans in the Senate are pleased with the limited scope of the plan. Some are advocating for a more comprehensive approach, suggesting that various issues be combined into one package due to concerns that they may not get another opportunity.
For now, however, they are moving forward quickly. “It’s not am I OK with it, is the president’s administration OK with it,” Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., a fiscal hawk who criticized his party’s previous reconciliation attempt. “I mean, do they think they have enough through fiscal year 2029? That’s their call, not mine.”