House Rejects Separate Budget Amendments with Funding for Amnesty

Published:  

The House of Representatives rejected two separate substitute amendments to Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-Wisc.) FY2015 budget resolution that would have included revenues and funding for immigration provisions included in S.744, the Senate-approved Schumer-Rubio-Obama amnesty bills. While both votes were reflective of bigger issues, the House has approved the Ryan budget without any immigration-related provisions other than standard enforcement.

On Wednesday, Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) introduced an amendment that would have replaced the Ryan budget with most of Pres. Obama's proposed budget. Obviously, Rep. Mulvaney doesn't support Pres. Obama's budget, but it gave House GOP Leaders a chance to force all House Members to go on record on the proposal. The proposal didn't spell out specific revenue and spending details for enacting a mass amnesty bill, but it did contain a provision that read, "Enact immigration reform."

Pres. Obama has made no secret of his support for a blanket amnesty for more than 11 million illegal aliens and the massive expansion in legal immigration, so the included language was clearly referring to S.744 or similar legislation. The Mulvaney amendment failed, however, 2-to-413 with only Reps. Jim Moran (D-Va.) and Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) voting in favor.

Earlier today, House Budget Committee Ranking Member Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) introduced a substitute amendment that would have replaced the Ryan budget by one drafted by House Democrats. It, too, included provisions for immigration reform, but more specifically, called for passage of H.R.15, the House version of S.744, and included revenues and costs for H.R.15 per the Congressional Budget Offices analysis of the bill. The Van Hollen amendment was also struck down 163-to-261 with 31 House Democrats joining with the Republicans.

Unlike last week's vote in the House Budget Committee, these two votes were not straight votes on immigration reform. However, it is two more instances of the full House going on record against the idea of "comprehensive immigration reform."