119th Congress or Red Wave In Adult Land

You do realize the 'single line' bill is used as a technicality to not sign the actual bill right?

Like do you know what would have to be done to pass a 'single line bill'?
 
thethe said:
You do realize the 'single line' bill is used as a technicality to not sign the actual bill right?

Like do you know what would have to be done to pass a 'single line bill'?
Click to expand...
enlighten me.

what is stopping MAGA MIKE JOHNSON from being a 1 page "fund ICE bill to the house floor tomorrow for a vote
 
THe whole point to put it in the OBBB was it was taking advantage of a technicality so they can just use a simple majority to pass the bill.
 
thethe said:
Correct - Have you heard of the filibuster?
Click to expand...
Yes, border security can be tied to a "clean" (or mostly clean) spending bill that bypasses the filibuster using the budget reconciliation process.

How It Works​

  • Reconciliation allows certain budget-related bills (affecting spending, revenues, or the debt limit) to pass the Senate with a simple majority (50 + VP tie-breaker) instead of 60 votes to overcome a filibuster.
  • Border security measures that involve direct funding(outlays) for things like:
    • Hiring Border Patrol/ICE agents
    • Building/maintaining border barriers/walls
    • CBP/ICE facilities and technology
    • Detention, enforcement, and operations
  • These qualify because they change federal spending. Pure policy changes (e.g., major regulatory overhauls without a clear budgetary impact) are often struck under the Byrd Rule, but funding provisions generally survive if properly drafted.

Real-World Examples (2025–2026)​

Republicans have already used (and are actively using) this exact approach:

  • The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (2025) included tens of billions for border wall construction, CBP/ICE personnel, facilities, and enforcement via reconciliation.
  • In 2026, Senate committees advanced targeted reconciliation bills providing $70–72 billion+ for ICE and CBP funding (multi-year) to bypass Democratic opposition in regular appropriations. This was done via a budget resolution instructing relevant committees.
This creates a mostly "clean" vehicle focused heavily on border/immigration enforcement spending.

​

Bottom line: Yes — a reconciliation bill can serve as a filibuster-proof vehicle for substantial border security funding while keeping it relatively focused ("clean"). This is the primary tool majorities use when they lack 60 Senate votes. It has been successfully employed recently for this very purpose.
 
sturg33 said:
Yes, border security can be tied to a "clean" (or mostly clean) spending bill that bypasses the filibuster using the budget reconciliation process.

How It Works​

  • Reconciliation allows certain budget-related bills (affecting spending, revenues, or the debt limit) to pass the Senate with a simple majority (50 + VP tie-breaker) instead of 60 votes to overcome a filibuster.
  • Border security measures that involve direct funding(outlays) for things like:
    • Hiring Border Patrol/ICE agents
    • Building/maintaining border barriers/walls
    • CBP/ICE facilities and technology
    • Detention, enforcement, and operations
  • These qualify because they change federal spending. Pure policy changes (e.g., major regulatory overhauls without a clear budgetary impact) are often struck under the Byrd Rule, but funding provisions generally survive if properly drafted.

Real-World Examples (2025–2026)​

Republicans have already used (and are actively using) this exact approach:

  • The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (2025) included tens of billions for border wall construction, CBP/ICE personnel, facilities, and enforcement via reconciliation.
  • In 2026, Senate committees advanced targeted reconciliation bills providing $70–72 billion+ for ICE and CBP funding (multi-year) to bypass Democratic opposition in regular appropriations. This was done via a budget resolution instructing relevant committees.
This creates a mostly "clean" vehicle focused heavily on border/immigration enforcement spending.

​

Bottom line: Yes — a reconciliation bill can serve as a filibuster-proof vehicle for substantial border security funding while keeping it relatively focused ("clean"). This is the primary tool majorities use when they lack 60 Senate votes. It has been successfully employed recently for this very purpose.
Click to expand...
You're asking the wrong question but what you did do is validate the approach that Trump and team took to make this happen.
 
Yes, House Republicans could pass a $10 billion spending bill focused on border security that would not be subject to the Senate filibuster, by using the budget reconciliation process.

How It Works​

  • A standalone or targeted reconciliation bill is possible if it fits within a budget resolution that provides reconciliation instructions to the relevant committees (e.g., House and Senate Homeland Security and Judiciary Committees).
  • Border security spending (for CBP, ICE, border wall, personnel, technology, detention, etc.) qualifies as it directly affects federal outlays/spending.
  • Reconciliation bills only need a simple majority in the Senate (50 votes + VP tie-breaker) and cannot be filibustered. Debate is limited.

Current Precedent (2026)​

Republicans are actively doing exactly this right now:

  • In April 2026, the House and Senate passed a budget resolution (S. Con. Res. 33) with instructions for a ~ $70 billion reconciliation package focused on multi-year funding for ICE and CBP/border security.
  • Senate committees have already released text for a $72 billion bill providing billions for ICE (~$38B) and CBP (~$26B+), with markup and floor votes planned.
  • This is separate from regular appropriations and is designed to be filibuster-proof.
A smaller $10 billion targeted bill would be even easier to fit under reconciliation rules.

Key Requirements & Limitations​

  • Budget resolution needed — The House must adopt (or have in place) reconciliation instructions allowing the spending. They already did this in 2026 for border funding.
  • Byrd Rule — Provisions must have a direct budgetary impact. Pure policy changes without spending are vulnerable to being struck by the Senate Parliamentarian. Funding for agents, walls, barriers, operations, etc., is generally allowed.
  • House passage is straightforward with the GOP majority (narrow but sufficient, as seen in prior votes like 215–211 or similar).
  • The bill would then go to the Senate for a simple-majority vote.
Bottom line: Yes — this is the exact tool Republicans are using in 2026 to fund border security without Democratic votes or overcoming a filibuster. A $10B version is entirely feasible.
 
I would love to understand why the man who promised to eliminate the debt and drain the swamp simply isn't willing to entertain a veto or a single spending bill.

worst case scenario is you get a bunch of democrats on record voting against border security
 
sturg33 said:
Yes, House Republicans could pass a $10 billion spending bill focused on border security that would not be subject to the Senate filibuster, by using the budget reconciliation process.

How It Works​

  • A standalone or targeted reconciliation bill is possible if it fits within a budget resolution that provides reconciliation instructions to the relevant committees (e.g., House and Senate Homeland Security and Judiciary Committees).
  • Border security spending (for CBP, ICE, border wall, personnel, technology, detention, etc.) qualifies as it directly affects federal outlays/spending.
  • Reconciliation bills only need a simple majority in the Senate (50 votes + VP tie-breaker) and cannot be filibustered. Debate is limited.

Current Precedent (2026)​

Republicans are actively doing exactly this right now:

  • In April 2026, the House and Senate passed a budget resolution (S. Con. Res. 33) with instructions for a ~ $70 billion reconciliation package focused on multi-year funding for ICE and CBP/border security.
  • Senate committees have already released text for a $72 billion bill providing billions for ICE (~$38B) and CBP (~$26B+), with markup and floor votes planned.
  • This is separate from regular appropriations and is designed to be filibuster-proof.
A smaller $10 billion targeted bill would be even easier to fit under reconciliation rules.

Key Requirements & Limitations​

  • Budget resolution needed — The House must adopt (or have in place) reconciliation instructions allowing the spending. They already did this in 2026 for border funding.
  • Byrd Rule — Provisions must have a direct budgetary impact. Pure policy changes without spending are vulnerable to being struck by the Senate Parliamentarian. Funding for agents, walls, barriers, operations, etc., is generally allowed.
  • House passage is straightforward with the GOP majority (narrow but sufficient, as seen in prior votes like 215–211 or similar).
  • The bill would then go to the Senate for a simple-majority vote.
Bottom line: Yes — this is the exact tool Republicans are using in 2026 to fund border security without Democratic votes or overcoming a filibuster. A $10B version is entirely feasible.
Click to expand...
Byrd rule would have struct this down in 2025
 
sturg33 said:
I would love to understand why the man who promised to eliminate the debt and drain the swamp simply isn't willing to entertain a veto or a single spending bill.

worst case scenario is you get a bunch of democrats on record voting against border security
Click to expand...
You think it matters if the left votes against border bills? They WANT to vote no for their careers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top