A newly proposed bipartisan border security package in the United States has sparked controversy and intense opposition from Republicans. The central provision of the legislation is a new authority that would grant the U.S. government the power to block migrants from entering the country. This measure has raised concerns among Republicans who claim it could incentivize more border crossings.
The key issue is a provision in the bill that would allow the Homeland Security secretary emergency authority to prohibit entry for most individuals if there is an average of over 4,000 unlawful border crossing attempts per day in a week. If the number reaches 5,000 or if 8,500 try to enter unlawfully in a single day, the use of this authority would become mandatory.
The bill, released by senators on Sunday, also includes other measures aimed at reducing the number of migrants, such as making it harder to claim asylum at the border and expanding detention facilities.
If the legislation becomes law, the new authority could be triggered almost immediately, given that border encounters exceeded 10,000 on certain days in December, which marked the highest month on record for illegal crossings. President Joe Biden has expressed his intention to use this authority to 'shut down' the border.
However, many Republicans argue that the number of border crossings should be zero. Some have even falsely suggested that the bill would permit an additional 5,000 migrants to enter the country per day, or weaken current standards.
New York Representative Elise Stefanik, the No. 4 Republican in the House, posted on social media platform X (formerly known as Twitter), claiming that the legislation would 'further incentivize thousands of illegals to pour in across our borders daily.'
Former President Donald Trump, who has been vocal about border security, criticized the threshold of 5,000 as 'record-setting stuff' and warned that supporting the package, which includes $60 billion in wartime aid for Ukraine, would be a 'death wish' for Republicans.
The strong and immediate opposition from GOP lawmakers, who have consistently called for stricter border measures, has frustrated some members of their own party. This backlash indicates that the bipartisan bill has little chance of passage, especially in an election year. House Speaker Mike Johnson declared it 'dead on arrival,' and a new hashtag, #killthebill, has appeared on the official X account for House Republicans.
The three main negotiators of the Senate bill, Republican Senator James Lankford, Independent Senator Kyrsten Sinema, and Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, have pushed back against the criticism. They emphasize that the bill aims to keep more people out rather than allowing more people to enter. They also highlight that migrants would lose the ability to apply for asylum if illegal border crossings reach certain thresholds.
The emergency authority in the bill is similar to one used by the Trump administration under Title 42, which allowed for the expulsion of migrants from the U.S. in the name of preventing the spread of COVID-19.
Senator Lankford clarified that opponents of the bill are basing their criticism on 'internet rumors' and that the emergency authority is designed to close the border and turn people around, not let them in.
Senator Sinema echoed this sentiment, explaining that under current laws, many individuals are released into the country. She argued that the bill provides tools to gain control of the border for the current administration and future administrations.
Senator Murphy dismissed claims that the bill would 'accept 5,000 illegal immigrants a day' as 'just made up bad faith nonsense.'
Nevertheless, some Republican critics argue that they will not accept any border security measures unless the border is completely shut down. Senator Jim Risch from Idaho said, 'One illegal immigrant. That's one too many. 5,000? Absolutely not.'
The contentious nature of the issue has highlighted the challenges of finding common ground. House Republicans initially proposed the idea of pairing Ukraine aid with border security, but when Democrats embraced the idea as a way to pass the aid package, House Republicans made clear that they were not willing to compromise.
Some Republican lawmakers have acknowledged that the divisive politics surrounding immigration could make it difficult to reach a bipartisan agreement, especially in an election year. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, who has backed the compromise, admitted that the issue of the border used to unite Republicans but now divides them. He acknowledged that the bill might not have the votes to pass, even though he personally supports it.
Despite the complexities of immigration law, and the fact that many members of Congress have not thoroughly studied the issue, strong opinions persist. Representative Dan Crenshaw from Texas noted that the narratives surrounding immigration are often driven by misunderstandings due to a lack of knowledge.
As the debate rages on, it remains uncertain whether this bipartisan border security package will gain support and become law. The polarized nature of the issue, coupled with the upcoming elections, makes it challenging for lawmakers to find common ground on this contentious topic.
