Asian Tribune Your Multilingual Newspaper covering World and local news News
Listen to this article
Estimated 5 minutes
The audio version of this article is generated by AI-based technology. Mispronunciations can occur. We are working with our partners to continually review and improve the results.
Senate Republicans abruptly left Washington on Thursday without voting on a roughly $70 billion US bill to fund immigration enforcement agencies, frustrated with the White House and at an impasse over whether to try to block a new settlement fund to compensate Trump allies who believe they have been politically prosecuted.
Republicans had already abandoned part of the bill that provided $1 billion US in security money for the White House complex and President Donald Trump’s ballroom amid backlash from members of their own party. But the $1.7 billion US settlement fund announced by the Justice Department this week prompted even more questions, spurring a push to limit the taxpayer dollars that some feared could go to Trump supporters who harmed law enforcement officers in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.
Republican leaders announced that they would not vote on the immigration enforcement measure until they returned from a Memorial Day recess the week of June 1, after an apparently tense meeting with acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on Thursday morning to discuss the fund.
Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell, the former Senate Republican leader, called the settlement “utterly stupid, morally wrong.”
“The nation’s top law enforcement official is asking for a slush fund to pay people who assault cops?” McConnell said in a statement afterward.
Several Republican senators have spoken out against the settlement fund, with North Carolina’s Thom Tillis on Thursday calling it “stupid on stilts.” Some are also upset by the president’s Tuesday endorsement of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a controversial figure, in next week’s primary runoff against longtime Republican Sen. John Cornyn.
Asked Thursday at the White House if he was losing control of the Senate, Trump replied: “I really don’t know. I can tell you — I only do what’s right.”
The Trump administration set up a roughly $1.8 billion US fund to support Americans facing domestic political persecution — but there are questions about accountability and who may benefit most from the cash. Andrew Chang explains how the Anti-Weaponization Fund originates with U.S. President Donald Trump’s own lawsuit, and the concerns about a conflict of interest.
(Photo credits: The Canadian Press, Reuters, Adobe Stock and Getty Images)
Money for ballroom irks some
Because the Republicans are trying to pass the immigration enforcement bill through a budget process, Democrats were able to make a series of amendment votes. The Democratic amendments would block the fund outright or ban any payments to Trump supporters who harmed law enforcement officers during the Capitol riot.
With the respect to the ballroom, about $220 million US was being asked for, to fund security improvements. Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy — the Republican Trump helped defeat in a primary last week — suggested that the White House was asking for a blank cheque.
“There’s no architectural plans, there is no environmentals, there’s no engineering,” said Cassidy.
Meanwhile, in the House, the majority Republicans struggled Thursday to find the votes to dismiss a bill that would compel Trump to withdraw from the war with Iran. They then delayed planned votes on the matter until June.
The House had scheduled a vote on a war powers resolution, brought by Democrats, that would rein in Trump’s military campaign. Previous votes had failed to pass, with a tie vote the result last week.
“We had the votes without question and they knew it, and as a result they’re playing a political game,” said Democratic Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, who sponsored the bill.
The lone Democrat who voted against the war powers resolution in previous votes, Rep. Jared Golden of Maine, has said he will vote in favour of the legislation next time.
Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana did not answer questions from reporters as he exited. House Republican Leader Steve Scalise, also of Louisiana, told reporters that the vote was delayed to give lawmakers who were absent a chance to vote.
White House says ceasefire freezes 60-day rule
On Capitol Hill, patience with the war has worn thin as the stalemate in the Strait of Hormuz disrupts global shipping and elevates gas prices in the U.S.
“People are beginning to finally listen to the American people who don’t support the war in Iran, and I think there’s a growing number of Republicans who see how devastating the war has been for our country,” said Rep. Adam Smith of Washington state, top Democrat on the chamber’s armed services committee.
Front Burner25:37Iran quagmire: why can’t the U.S. end the war?
While Republicans have been supportive of Trump’s efforts to destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities, some are now saying the president’s legal timeline to wage a war without congressional approval has expired. Under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, presidents have 60 days to engage in a military conflict before Congress must either declare war or authorize the use of military force.
“We’re past 60 days so it’s got to be brought to us to vote on. We’re following the law,” said Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, a Pennsylvania Republican, adding that he plans to vote for the war powers resolution.
The White House argues that the requirements of the War Powers Resolution no longer apply because of the ceasefire with Iran. But earlier this week, Trump said he was just an hour away from ordering another strike on Iran, holding off because Gulf allies said they were engaged in negotiations to end the war.