Boy, oh boy. Paul Ryan and House Republicans went out of their way to include some very specific language in their trillion dollar budget to ensure that it would prevent any and all funding of President Trump’s border wall.
And in case you’ve missed it, here’s a comprehensive list of what Paul Ryan’s new budget bill will fund:
-Central American illegal immigrant centers
-Domestic spending will increase
-No cuts in funding to EPA despite Trump’s promises
-Continue payment on Obamacare subsidies
-No funding cuts to sanctuary cities
Did you get all of that? Good. Now, here’s the specific language included in the budget bill that forbids the funding of Trump’s border wall.
Per The Washington Post:
“There are explicit restrictions to block the border wall. We knew last week there would be no money to start construction on a project that the president says is more important to his base than anything else. But the final agreement goes further, putting strict limitations on how Trump can use new money for border security (e.g. to invest in new technology and repair existing fencing). Administration officials have insisted they already have the statutory authority to start building the wall under a 2006 law. This prevents such an end run.
The $1.5 billion for border security is also half as much as the White House requested. Additionally, there are no cuts in funding to sanctuary cities, something a federal judge said last week would be required for the Justice Department to follow through on its threats. And there is also no money for a deportation force.”
And if that isn’t bad enough, folks – well – just see for yourself:
— The lack of aggressive messaging from Republican leadership, and especially the White House, late Sunday is one of the reasons that coverage is so lopsidedly bad for them in this morning’s papers and on cable news. Here are 10 examples:
- “Overall, the compromise resembles more of an Obama administration-era budget than a Trump one,” Bloomberg reports.
- The Associated Press calls it “a lowest-common-denominator measure that won’t look too much different than the deal that could have been struck on Obama’s watch last year.”
- Reuters: “While Republicans control the House, Senate and White House, Democrats scored … significant victories in the deal.”
- The Los Angeles Times describes the agreement as “something of an embarrassment to the White House”: “Trump engineered the fiscal standoff shortly after he was elected, insisting late last year that Congress should fund the government for only a few months so he could put his stamp on federal spending as the new president.”
- The headline on FoxNews.com is “Spending bill language omits border wall funding, sanctuary cities crackdown”: “It also rejectsWhite House budget director Mick Mulvaney’s proposals to cut popular programs such as funding medical research and community development grants.”
- New York Times A1: “The deal should spare Republicans the embarrassment of seeing the government shut down on their watch. But it also gave a glimpse of the reluctance of lawmakers to bend to Mr. Trump’s spending priorities, like his desire for sharp cuts to domestic programs.”
- The Wall Street Journal’s headline notes the $2 billion for Obama’s moon shot, plus the EPA and Planned Parenthood being left intact.
- “Congressional negotiators basically told the Trump administration to take a hike,” David Nather writes on Axios.
- NPR says Democrats “flexed their leverage in spending negotiations.”
- Vox: “Conservatives got almost nothing they wanted.”