What’s Really Happening Is Democrats Are Blocking Department of Homeland Security Funding

[Valin]

Daily Signal:

Genevieve Wood

February 04, 2015

 

The headline in one Washington newspaper read: “Senate Dems block legislation reversing immigration actions.”

 

That’s one way to see it.

 

A more accurate headline would have been: “Senate Democrats block debate over legislation funding the Department of Homeland Security.”

 

The latter is exactly what all 45 Senate Democrats did earlier this week when they voted against “the motion to proceed” on a House bill that would fully fund the Department of Homeland Security once its current short-term budget runs out on Feb. 27.

 

(Snip)

 

 

H/T Power Line

[Valin]

Meanwhile over at Mother Jones.....

Will Republicans Shut Down the Department of Homeland Security?
Kevin Drum
Wed Feb. 4, 2015

Paul Waldman notes today that Republicans have made a hash out of their first month in control of Congress, and I'd say he's right about that. They keep getting distracted by events—executive actions from President Obama, vaccination pratfalls, infighting over symbolic votes, etc.—and that's prevented them from doing much to advance their real agenda. Here's one example:

Republicans tried to pass a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security and repeal President Obama’s executive actions on immigration. Senate Democrats filibustered it, and in its current form it’s dead, meaning we’re headed for another shutdown mini-crisis. Spoiler alert: Republicans will lose, caving in and funding the department.

Hmmm. Although I agree with Waldman in general, Brian Beutler makes an interesting argument that he might be wrong in this particular case. Maybe Republicans won't cave on the Homeland Security funding bill:


(Snip)

 

Of course, even a fight over DHS would be a distraction for Republicans, something they really weren't planning on spending time on. So if it weren't for the fact that compromise is considered basically treasonous in the tea party era, I'd say that some kind of modest compromise might be possible here. And who knows? It might still be. Despite all the sound and fury, the hard truth is that none of this is really all that big a deal.

 

But it might become one, even if Republican leaders would prefer otherwise. That's the downside of giving tea partiers control of their agenda, isn't it?