$1B for White House ballroom in Senate's $72B reconciliation bill with ICE, Border Patrol funding

0:00 Senate Republicans want to spend a billion dollars in taxpayer funds on security

0:04 upgrades at President Trump's new ballroom on the grounds of the White House.

0:08 It's part of a party line spending package that also

0:10 includes tens of billions of dollars in funding for immigration enforcement.

0:14 Here to discuss is the Hill's Senate reporter Alexander Bolton.

0:17 Hey Alex.

0:18 So, all along President Trump has been saying

0:20 this ballroom is being paid for by private donations.

0:23 Now, Senate Republicans want to spend a billion dollars for the project.

0:26 Now, the legislation specifies none of the funds

0:28 may be used for non-security elements,

0:30 but do you think there is a risk for Republicans seeming

0:34 out of touch spending money like this at a time when,

0:36 you know, gas prices are well over $4 a gallon?

0:41 Well, certainly, and that's why when Chuck Schumer put out

0:44 his statement in response to the Senate Republican reconciliation bill,

0:48 he said that Republicans are on another planet.

0:51 And while regular American families are struggling

0:55 to afford everyday goods like gasoline and food,

0:59 the Trump administration and the Republicans in the Senate

1:02 want to spend 70 billion dollars more

1:04 on immigration enforcement raids and a billion dollars

1:09 on security related to the {quote} East Wing renovation,

1:13 which is the construction of the new White House ballroom.

1:16 Although, as you mentioned,

1:17 there's language in the reconciliation bill specifying that none

1:20 of the money may be used for non-security related purposes.

1:24 But, this ballroom is going to sit on top of a national security complex,

1:30 and probably in a Secret Service annex as well.

1:32 And the bill bill the the billion dollars is,

1:36 you know, more than the projected cost of the entire project.

1:39 So, you kind of wonder, why is there that much money?

1:42 And the other question is, you know,

1:44 are there really going to be safeguards against,

1:47 you know, that that not going into the construction of the ballroom itself?

1:50 President Trump has said that this ballroom

1:51 is going to be drone proof drone proof.

1:53 It's going to have It's going to be a hardened space.

1:55 So, you know, that money may may go to build most of the ballroom

2:00 except for perhaps the the chandelier and and decor and stuff like that.

2:05 You have great sources over in the Senate.

2:07 You talk to Republicans all the time.

2:09 When they're able to share their true feelings,

2:11 is there any consternation on their part from moving

2:14 forward with a package that spends money in this way,

2:17 you know, maybe even just heading into an election year?

2:21 I think the ballroom is going to be

2:23 controversial because this is something that has been,

2:27 you know, already debated.

2:28 I wrote a story a a few days ago about how Republicans were very

2:33 critical of the idea that taxpayer money would be used to pay for the ballroom.

2:36 Now, it's going to hinge on the semantics of, well, you know,

2:40 this isn't to build any of the, you know, party stuff in the ballroom.

2:44 It's to build the security stuff, which is a, you know,

2:47 underground a national security military type

2:50 complex as described by Lindsey Graham.

2:53 He also talked about building a Secret Service annex, but, you know,

2:57 the entire cost of what Lindsey Graham proposed in terms of what the taxpayers

3:03 would spend on building the ballroom was 400 billion I'm sorry, 400 million.

3:07 And so, this amount of money in in the package is already,

3:10 you know, more than double that.

3:12 So, why so much?

3:14 I think is a question.

3:15 And you know, already Democrats are honing in on it homing in on it.

3:19 They want to, you know, blow this up as an issue.

3:21 They want to, you know, hold Republicans to account.

3:24 So, I think there probably will be an amendment

3:26 on the floor to to shrink that money,

3:28 but, you know, I'm not sure it's going to pass.

3:31 It's it's the probably most politically salient element

3:35 of of this reconciliation package given, you know,

3:37 that the immigration debate elsewhere has been, you know,

3:40 really well worn and and [snorts] well discussed.

3:42 And I think Republicans are 100% on board with providing an additional,

3:47 you know, 70 billion dollars for ICE and Customs and Border Protection.

3:52 On the funding for ICE and Border Patrol, these were aspects of the Department

3:56 of Homeland Security that Democrats refused to fund.

3:58 So, they were carved out and Republicans aimed

4:01 to fund them through this party line vote.

4:02 The legislation would give 30 million dollar 30 billion dollars to ICE,

4:06 22 billion dollars to CBP.

4:09 Combined, those agencies got what,

4:11 170 billion dollars in the one big beautiful bill that passed last summer?

4:14 Why are Republicans now pressing for more money for those agencies?

4:21 Well, you know, there's been a lot of kind

4:23 of back and forth within the Republican conference as to whether

4:25 all that money that was allocated in the one

4:29 big beautiful bill can actually be used to pay,

4:32 you know, salaries for personnel, you know, going forward several years.

4:36 And you know, you hear conflicting things about this.

4:39 But, what I've heard from Republicans Senate Republicans is that, you know,

4:44 that money is was not completely unfettered that was

4:48 included in the one big beautiful bill act last year.

4:52 That money, you know, could not continue to pay ICE and and Border

4:56 Patrol salaries just for the next several years.

4:59 And that's why they had to, you know, move this additional package.

5:02 Now, you know, whenever you talk to the appropriators about it,

5:05 they're they're they're pretty evasive, to be honest.

5:07 I mean, I asked Susan Collins about this.

5:08 I didn't, you know, didn't get a really, you know, straight answer.

5:10 But, what I heard is that they felt that that money, you know,

5:15 was was not freed up enough to continue to pay the the salaries

5:19 and also the the training costs for for ICE personnel and and border personnel.

5:24 And that's really what this is all about because the Trump administration,

5:27 you know, they want to continue these immigration enforcement raids.

5:30 You know, they want to put boots on the ground

5:31 in in sanctuary cities to to deport people.

5:36 And so, you know, they they need those people to be paid.

5:39 And what I had heard is that they just felt there wasn't sufficient flexibility

5:43 in how the money was allocated in the in the one big beautiful bill.

5:46 But, let me tell you, you know,

5:46 there are people I've been talking all sides of this issue.

5:49 You know, some the Thune had claimed for a long time that and I'm

5:53 talking about Senate Republican leader John Thune

5:55 that that would be enough to, you know,

5:56 pay for ICE and Border Patrol operations.

5:58 But, if you kind of press a little harder, there was concern that, well,

6:02 that may not be the case just given how that that funny how that money was,

6:06 you know, allocated technically last year.

6:08 Notwithstanding the White House ballroom element,

6:10 the this reconciliation package is rather narrow.

6:14 Will there be pressure, do you think, from Republicans,

6:16 especially over in the House,

6:17 to tack on other priorities like new voting restrictions?

6:21 Or is that going to be left to a possible reconciliation bill 3.0?

6:28 It's too late to expand the scope of this bill.

6:30 The the this bill the scope of this bill is

6:34 constrained by the Senate budget resolution and the House budget resolution,

6:38 which have already passed.

6:39 There's a joint budget resolution that that now has

6:42 unlocked the reconciliation process and and set very strict parameters.

6:46 So, there are instructions that have gone just to the Judiciary Committee

6:49 and the Homeland Security Committee to to come up with this funding for ICE,

6:54 Customs and Border Protection, Secret Service.

6:57 Cuz those are all things in those committees' jurisdiction.

7:00 Also, Department of Justice is getting some money.

7:02 When you talk about elements of the SAVE Act,

7:04 that's the Senate Rules Committee's jurisdiction.

7:07 So, that would be ruled out of order if it was included in this package.

7:11 So, that's a that's a clear non-starter.

7:13 And then, you know, there's been talk about, well, what about defense money?

7:15 We need 80 billion to perhaps 100 billion dollars to to pay

7:20 for defense given the the the drain posed by the the war with Iran.

7:26 That is also outside the scope of this budget reconciliation bill.

7:30 That is under the jurisdiction of the Armed Services Committee.

7:33 Likewise, if you want to add any tax legislation,

7:35 that's under the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee.

7:37 So, neither Rules Committee neither neither I'm sorry,

7:40 neither Rules Committee nor Finance Committee nor

7:44 Armed Services Committee has received an instruction here.

7:46 So, you cannot add any language expanding this bill unless you were to get,

7:51 you know, eight Democrats to vote for it, which isn't going to happen.

7:53 So, that that ship has sailed.

7:55 Whether there's a third reconciliation package, you know,

7:57 that's something I'm working on for my next story.

8:00 And there's a lot of disagreement among Republicans about

8:03 how to do that and whether to do that.

8:05 That could be very interesting to watch.

8:06 So, on this reconciliation bill that we're talking about now,

8:09 the 72 billion dollar package,

8:11 how easily do you think this is going to get through with Republican votes,

8:16 not just in the Senate, but also over in the House?

8:20 I mean, it's a slam dunk in the Senate.

8:23 It's a slam dunk in the House.

8:24 I mean, this is as easy as it gets for Republicans.

8:28 You're voting for money to, you know,

8:30 continue border security and and immigration enforcement operations.

8:37 There's there's there's no disunity, no disagreement about that.

8:40 So, they're they're all agreed on that.

8:42 As I mentioned, you know, this billion dollars for the ballroom,

8:46 that's going to get some complaining.

8:48 And there could be an amendment to, you know, cut that in half.

8:51 And just to go over the math, you know, what Lindsey Graham,

8:53 he has a bill to pay for the ballroom and a security complex beneath it.

8:58 The total cost that he's proposed for that is 400 billion.

9:00 This is I'm sorry, 400 million.

9:03 400 million.

9:04 The amount of money in this reconciliation package is more than double that.

9:07 So, you know, it it begs the question, why why so much?

9:10 Why are you, you know, providing, you know, more than,

9:14 you know, twice what's this project is, you know, estimated to cost?

9:17 And, you know, can we really believe

9:19 that's only going to cover the security stuff?

9:21 You know, it probably, you know, I think folks will be skeptical of that.

9:24 So, that's going to be an interesting, you know, fight.

9:26 But, you know, given the, you know, 72 billion dollar size of this package,

9:30 that one billion dollars for the ballroom is is relatively small.

9:33 So, you know, I'm not sure how much of raging a debate it will be.

9:36 But, it will be interesting to watch this when it comes to the Senate floor.

9:39 And it's expected the week of May 18th.

9:43 Yeah, it'll be interesting to watch that debate.

9:44 And then, also really looking forward

9:46 to your reporting on the possibility of a reconciliation

9:49 3.0 because the differences and the disagreements

9:51 might be even more profound there.

9:53 So, something we'll be watching for.

9:55 Alexander Bolton, always great to have your insight.

9:59 Thanks for having me.

10:05 [music]