Maintaining Funds for National Security

Last November, the president announced that he planned to unilaterally grant legal status to millions of illegal immigrants. Republicans in Congress contended that this move was unconstitutional and that the president does not have the authority to take such sweeping action without the consent of Congress. Public opinion polls suggest that the majority of the American people believe so as well.

Accordingly, in December, both chambers of Congress voted on legislation to fund the government, which included full funding for all but one of the regular appropriations bills through the end of the fiscal year. At that time, in order to prevent funding of the president’s unconstitutional immigration plan, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was funded under a temporary measure that expired before the plan could be implemented.

Several weeks ago in mid-January under the new Republican-led Congress, the House of Representatives immediately addressed the need to fully fund the Department of Homeland Security. However, when responsibly voting to fund DHS earlier this year, lawmakers didn’t forget about the president’s unconstitutional action. Passage of the legislation included five amendments to block funding for the president’s immigration plan. Unfortunately, Senate Democrats blocked that very same legislation and instead sent a bill to the House that would fund DHS through the end of the fiscal year without placing any limits on the president’s immigration scheme.

With the funding for the Department of Homeland Security dangerously set to expire last week, both chambers of Congress on Friday voted to fund DHS for another week. While I certainly would have preferred a longer term solution and hope we can find one this week, I believe it is more important to prevent any lapse in funding from occurring. In a world where our enemies are numerous and seem only to become more dangerous, it is unacceptable to cut off critical funds—even for a short time—that protect the lives of Americans by helping maintain our nation’s readiness and ability to combat our dangerous enemies.

Some have expressed concern about consideration of similar bills funding the president’s unconstitutional executive action announced in November. Since the president unveiled his plan before the American people, 26 states have taken action against the president’s overreach and are currently challenging the constitutionality of his executive action. In Oklahoma, that effort has been led by Attorney General Scott Pruitt. Because the president’s plan raises legitimate legal concerns, it recently led a federal judge in Texas to halt the plan until courts determine its constitutionality. That means that until the courts come to a final decision, the president’s plan cannot move forward.

While I remain deeply opposed to the president’s overreach, I do believe it is important to respect our country’s system of checks and balances and allow the courts to decide the fate of the executive action. As the United States Congress awaits the decision of the courts, it would be well advised to continue responsibly funding DHS, rather than jeopardizing the safety and security of Americans.