President Biden Combines Border Security Funding with Aid Packages for Israel and Ukraine

31

President Joe Biden is employing a strategic approach to garner bipartisan support for increased financial aid to Ukraine by incorporating billions of dollars for U.S.-Mexico border security. This tactic emerged following the exclusion of Ukraine aid from an interim budget measure, due in part to mounting Republican opposition to funding the ongoing conflict.

Significant developments have occurred since the end of September: the Speaker of the House has vacated their position, leaving Republicans in a state of disorganization over the selection of a successor. Additionally, an attack on Israel by Hamas on October 7 has resulted in a more substantial funding request from the White House.

It remains uncertain whether the inclusion of approximately $14 billion for border security, as a component of the $106 billion spending package sent to Congress last Friday, will mollify opposition.

Representative Dan Crenshaw, a Texas Republican, articulated that the underlying issue at the border is not financial but policy-oriented. “The question of border security is primarily a matter of policy rather than funding. The need of the hour is policy discussion at the White House,” he stated.

Persisting Challenges at the U.S.-Mexico Border

Though the Middle East conflict has temporarily diverted attention from the border, the immigration issues that the United States faces are increasingly complex and problematic. Local and state Democratic leaders are urgently requesting federal aid to alleviate the abysmal living conditions of migrants. Concurrently, Republican leaders vociferously criticize Biden’s border policies for being insufficiently stringent. Meanwhile, Congress has yet to enact comprehensive immigration reforms.

Illegal border crossings have seen a 21% increase, totaling 218,763 last month. While President Biden continually emphasizes the need for Congressional action to update outdated immigration laws, his administration has meanwhile implemented policies aimed at deterring perilous migration and establishing new avenues for legal immigration.

Details of the Funding Request

The proposal by the White House seeks to manage not just border crossings but also the escalating numbers of migrants already within the U.S., awaiting adjudication of their cases. Included in the funding request is $1.6 billion for 1,600 new asylum officers and processing staff, potentially doubling the workforce focused on asylum cases. The package also proposes $1.4 billion for 375 new immigration judges and accompanying teams, in addition to funding for 1,300 new border patrol agents. A further $4.4 billion is designated for Homeland Security initiatives, encompassing increased funding for detention facilities as the administration aims to expedite deportation of individuals ineligible for asylum.

Colleen Putzel, an associate policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute, noted, “This constitutes a genuine effort to address the existing backlog.”

Moreover, $1.3 billion has been earmarked for regional migration centers outside the United States. This initiative, orchestrated by the Biden administration, aims to dissuade potential migrants from embarking on the perilous journey through the Darien Gap between South and Central America by providing an alternative means to seek asylum.

State Responses and Political Divides

However, the sum of money allocated seems insufficient for cities like New York, which alone expects to spend over $5 billion by the end of the fiscal year on managing migrant issues. Local and state Democratic officials have been vocal in their calls for more financial assistance.

Republican opposition remains steadfast, particularly regarding the allocation of funds to individuals already in the country. A consortium of Republican senators convened last Thursday to discuss alternative proposals they could endorse. While some expressed conditional support for the aid to Israel and Ukraine if accompanied by robust border security measures, consensus remains elusive.

Senator Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, cautioned against conflating policy overhaul with budgetary concerns. “Attempting to resolve our long-standing disagreements on immigration through a supplemental funding bill seems like a recipe for failure,” he noted.

For his part, Representative Crenshaw acknowledged agreement with the three main objectives of the White House proposal: aid to Ukraine, Israel, and border security. However, he emphasized, “The crux of the matter will lie in the specifics. Addressing the border crisis is predominantly a policy issue, which includes, but is not limited to, essential reforms in the asylum process.”

---

Contributions to this report were made by Big Big News writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Kevin Freking in Washington, Claire Savage in Chicago, Mike Casey in Boston, Patrick Whittle in Portland, Maine, Lisa Rathke in Montpelier, Vt., and Holly Ramer in Concord, N.H.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Biden spending package

More about Biden spending package

• Biden Administration’s Spending Proposal
• Republican Opposition to Foreign Aid
• Recent Developments on U.S.-Mexico Border
• Hamas Attack on Israel
• Rep. Dan Crenshaw’s Statements on Border Policy
• Federal and State Response to Migration Crisis
• U.S. Immigration Law and Policy