Robert C. Byrd, the father of the arcane Senate budget process and a famous stickler for the chamber\u2019s rules, was not happy in 1985 when some of his colleagues began tucking extraneous items into special budget bills to dodge the filibuster.<\/p>\n
\u201cSuch an extraordinary process, if abused, could destroy the Senate\u2019s deliberative nature,\u201d Mr. Byrd said in a floor speech in which he scolded his colleagues about misusing a legislative weapon that was supposed to be deployed sparingly.<\/p>\n
It is safe to say that Mr. Byrd, the West Virginia Democrat who was also the chairman of the Appropriations Committee before his passing in 2010, would be even more dismayed today. Stymied by Democrats on funding President Trump\u2019s immigration crackdown in the normal fashion, Senate Republicans are muscling through legislation to provide more than $70 billion by employing the special budget exemption that was never intended to be used that way.<\/p>\n
They have seized on budget reconciliation \u2014 a process that was created to make it easier to do the politically risky work of cutting spending or raising taxes by shielding such measures from filibusters \u2014 to overcome Democratic resistance to funding Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection.<\/p>\n
Even one of the masterminds of the current approach concedes it is not the way it is supposed to be done.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou have an appropriations process that failed,\u201d said Senator Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican who is the chairman of the Budget Committee. \u201cWhat am I going to do? Go back home and say I have to sit on the sidelines when I have the power to do something about it? If I have the power to get money for the Border Patrol and ICE, I\u2019m gonna do it.\u201d<\/p>\n
Yet some of his Republican colleagues are questioning exactly why funding is being approved this way. They fear that the approach could become routine whenever political resistance pops up, undermining the traditional appropriations process \u2014 which requires some degree of bipartisan consensus because spending bills need 60 votes to advance \u2014 as lawmakers seek the easy way out.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhy is it in a reconciliation package as opposed to just being priorities within the regular appropriations process?\u201d asked Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska and a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, referring to Secret Service funding the White House requested be included in the bill. \u201cIf this was a priority for the administration, why was this not included in the president\u2019s budget request that came out a couple of months ago?\u201d<\/p>\n
Democrats assail the whole enterprise as a gross abuse of the budget law that will have severe consequences in the future while limiting Congress\u2019s role in overseeing how money is spent.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Republicans are turning reconciliation into an appropriations bill process,\u201d said Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon, the senior Democrat on the Budget Committee, who noted the original legislation that created reconciliation was passed unanimously in 1974. \u201cNot one was against it. Why? Solely it was reserved for reducing deficits.\u201d<\/p>\n
Senator Chris Van Hollen, the Maryland Democrat who has sat on the Budget Committee in both the Senate and the House, said the Republican approach \u201cis taking a wrecking ball to the whole process.\u201d<\/p>\n
He warned that Democrats would be within their rights to employ the same tactic if they regained power.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat goes around comes around,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Democrats did include direct spending in their huge Covid-era reconciliation bill during the Biden administration, though the scope of that legislation went much further.<\/p>\n
Republicans then turned around and included significant spending for immigration enforcement last year in their sweeping policy legislation that extended tax cuts and cut social safety net programs.<\/p>\n
But the current bill represents a new frontier entirely. It consists solely of spending for immigration enforcement and a few other administration priorities, with no attempt to reduce the impact on the deficit by cuts elsewhere or offset the spending in any way.<\/p>\n
Senator John Thune, Republican of South Dakota and the majority leader, conceded that \u201cthis reconciliation bill is not like any other that we\u2019ve done before.\u201d He blamed Democratic resistance for leaving Republicans no alternative.<\/p>\n
Democrats refused to back money for Mr. Trump\u2019s immigration crackdown after the White House refused to place restrictions on enforcement tactics following the killings of two American citizens by federal immigration agents.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe principal objective in this reconciliation bill is to ensure that ICE and C.B.P. are funded, not only today, but for the foreseeable future, given the unwillingness of the Democrats to do anything to enforce the law in this country or to provide resources for our law enforcement efforts in this country,\u201d Mr. Thune said this week. \u201cAnd that\u2019s why we are where we are.\u201d<\/p>\n