Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

EarlG

(23,631 posts)

3. I *think* it means

Reply to Strelnikov_ (Reply #2)

Tue Mar 24, 2026, 01:35 PM

Mar 24

That Republicans are going to capitulate to Democrats and agree to pass a bipartisan bill which funds TSA etc, but does not give additional funds to ICE. That's the part that Democrats are satisfied with.

After that, Republicans will ram through the additional ICE funding using reconciliation:

Republicans are looking at using reconciliation to pass more ICE funding as well as parts of their partisan GOP elections bill, the SAVE America Act, according to the person and another person granted anonymity to discuss the matter.

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/23/dhs-shutdown-talks-breakthrough-00841195

That cannot be filibustered, and it will pass on a party-line vote -- Democrats will vote against it, but there's nothing they can do procedurally to stop it. So the additional ICE funding and any other BS in that bill will be all the GOP's own work, and nothing to do with Democrats.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Rhiannon12866

21 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Top Senate Republicans coalesce behind plan to end DHS shutdown [View all] groundloop Mar 24 OP

They can't "muscle through" the SAVE act Fiendish Thingy Mar 24 #1

"Republicans plan to muscle through a partisan bill without Democratic votes to fund the rest of the ICE agency . . . Strelnikov_ Mar 24 #2

I *think* it means EarlG Mar 24 #3

Do they have a parliamentarian that would allow the save act to be included in reconciliation, though? SSJVegeta Mar 24 #5

The article says "parts" of the bill EarlG Mar 24 #10

I was thinking the same way on the DHS funding, but how can SAVE act provisions be thrown into a reconcilation bill? Strelnikov_ Mar 24 #6

I don't think most of SAVE can be included EarlG Mar 24 #11

"...nothing to do with Democrats." If the Dems vote as a block. But will they? littlemissmartypants Mar 24 #9

Maybe Fetterman will, but he's stated he's opposed to the SAVE act so EarlG Mar 24 #12

I see it as Democrats conceding angrychair Mar 24 #15

No concessions so far, at least... EarlG Mar 24 #18

It means they are pleased with the direction mcar Mar 24 #16

"But key Democrats said they were pleased with the direction, even without knowing all of the details." Scrivener7 Mar 24 #4

Yea, seems like we eat crow a lot, but bluestarone Mar 24 #8

That's because Republicans are agreeing to the part that Democrats want -- EarlG Mar 24 #13

Right. Hopefully our side will notice this. Scrivener7 Mar 24 #19

Isn't ICE already funded through 2029? pcdb Mar 24 #20

My understanding is that ICE is well-funded already EarlG Mar 24 #21

Let the games begin.... I guess. FUCKICE. Just to be clear. littlemissmartypants Mar 24 #7

What about what that Ohh That's Rich says: poli-junkie Mar 24 #14

I hope so but progressoid Mar 24 #17