House chairman: $3.7 billion request 'too much'

Obama requested funds for dealing with tens of thousands of kids who've been arriving at U.S.-Mexico border
Associated Press
Jul 11, 2014

A key Republican said Friday that President Barack Obama's multibillion-dollar emergency request for the border is too big to get through the House, as a growing number of Democrats rejected policy changes Republicans are demanding as their price for approving any money.

The developments indicated that Obama faces an uphill climb as he pushes Congress to approve $3.7 billion to deal with tens of thousands of unaccompanied kids who've been arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border from poor and gang-ridden Central American nations. And they suggested that even as the children keep coming, any final resolution is likely weeks away on Capitol Hill.

As House members gathered Friday morning to finish up legislative business for the week, Rep. Hal Rogers of Kentucky, chairman of the Appropriations Committee that controls spending, told reporters: "It's too much money. We don't need it."

Rogers, who'd previously sounded open to the spending request for more immigration judges, State Department programs and other items, said that Obama's request includes some spending to meet immediate needs, and his committee is working to sort that out.

But he said other aspects can be handled through Congress' regular spending bills, though no final action is likely on those until after the November midterm elections. And asked whether the House would approve the spending package as-is, he said "no."

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest responded by saying that "we're open to working with Democrats and Republicans in Congress to get this done."

"The thing that I would point out, though, is that the president has moved quickly to be very clear about what specifically needs to be funded," Earnest said. "And we would like to see Republicans back up their rhetoric with the kind of urgent action that this situation merits."

Rogers spoke shortly after the Congressional Hispanic Caucus convened a press conference to denounce efforts to attach legal changes to the spending measure that would result in returning the children home more quickly to El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala. Those countries account for the bulk of the more than 57,000 kids who've arrived since October.

Republicans are demanding such changes, and White House officials also have indicated support, while House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid left the door open to them this week.

But key Senate Democrats are opposed, and members of the all-Democratic Hispanic Caucus added their strong objections Friday that sending the kids home quickly without immigration hearings could put them at risk.

"I don't know of a man or a woman in the Congressional Hispanic Caucus who is going to vote to undermine the rights of these children," said Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill. "It would be unconscionable for us to do that."

Gutierrez said the lawmakers would make that same case directly to Obama in a meeting next week. And he pleaded for Democrats to stand firm.

"I'm tired of every time the Republicans raise their voices against the immigrants that somehow we ameliorate, we change our position and weaken our stance," Gutierrez said. "Our stance should be clear — we're for the immigrants."

The policy changes in question concern a 2008 law aimed at helping victims of human trafficking that appears to be contributing to the current crisis by ensuring court hearings for the children now arriving from Central America. In practice, that often allows them to stay in this country for years as their cases wend their way through the badly backlogged immigration court system, and oftentimes they never show up for their court dates.

Obama administration officials along with Republican lawmakers want to change the law so that Central American kids can be treated the same way as Mexican kids, who can be turned around quickly by Border Patrol agents.

"If you want to stop the problem, treat the children humanely and send them back. I guarantee you it will work," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Friday in a speech in Louisville.

Democrats and advocacy groups say such a change would put the kids in jeopardy.

"We will oppose this link even if it means the funding bill goes down," said Kevin Appleby, director of migration and refugee policy for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. If the changes go through, "They'll be sent back to their persecutors with no help whatsoever, and possibly to their deaths."

The border controversy spilled over to a gathering of the National Governors Association in Nashville, Tenn., where governors of both parties blamed a gridlocked Congress.

"Congress needs to act," declared Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, the group's Republican chairman. "They are children, so we want to treat them very humanely, but we also have a lot of concerns for the health and wellness of our citizens in our state."





Imagine that?
The Republicans saying no to people in trouble?

$3.7 billion is chump change to many American businesses.

The Big Dog's back

"Listen, the only way to win a Republican primary these days is to out-crazy all the other candidates. And I think a lot of Americans wished they’d all get off their TV screens, just get the hell out of [our] lives. Americans want somebody who’s actually going to take a stab at solving their problems. The Republicans are always getting in their way, and saying something crazy in the process."

Darwin's choice

So, creating a "problem" by his own inaction, you know, not following the laws already on the books, then flailing around campaigning yet again, and you have the gall to blame "the other guys"? You're absolutely stupid.



Darwin's deuce -

You're not even on the same page as this article.

You really do have people think for you.



Half of the time, Republicans whine about Obama being weak, not taking action. The other half of the time, he is labeled "dictator", "imperial".
He isn't campaigning - he already has the job. He is doing the absolute smartest thing possible when faced with a completely intransigent Republican House who refuse to do their job: he is rallying support among the common people.

Republicans not only won't pass any legislation, they won't even let things come to a vote. Your party already shut down the government, and continues to make sure that nothing gets done, yet you have the gall to blame Obama for trying to find a way to make government work?


Quick coastie.... I know you're on top of things.... how many bills have gotten lost on Reid's desk? Answer: PLENTY! So there's blame to go on both sides.

FYI....the common people are taking a hosing under Obama...taxes going up (thank you ACA) and blacks (his people) are really hurting under him.


it is always best to give citations to where you do your copy and paste from... unless you are hiding the fact that it is from a leftwing nutjob email chain... from a conversation between two leftwing nut jobs Rev. Al Sharpton and Congressman Alan Grayson.


This is another example of high quality research and individual thought from the puppy. Thanks for being an example... again. Read something other than leftwing nut material. It won't rot your brain as fast as your current choices.

The Big Dog's back

Awwwwwww. poor deuce pooh. Truth just kills you.


Yes so much of your "truth" that no legitimate media outlet will print it. As I said before, read something more than leftwing nutjob blogs, and now email chains. When legit media sources won't print that foolishness it says volumes, and you lick that toilet bowl clean.

The Big Dog's back

deuce pooh, as long as you keep looking up my posts, that takes away from you spreading more lies on here.


10 seconds to copy and paste into search and 2 minutes to copy and paste onto here, not much time for someone who was able to save, invest, and retire early. I have time to spare. It is fun rubbing you nose in it and it does clean the toilet bowl when I do so, it's what I consider a bonus, piddle puppy.


Why not use the funding we would normally send to Mexico to take care of the mess? I bet Mexico would close their southern border pretty fast!


Yeah, why not? Mexico watches their border for less than ours. They captured an American Marine and has had him detained. Meanwhile some of these "unattended children", "refugees", "immigrant children", or whatever they're called this week, are making their way into America with open arms and on taxpayers dimes.


Re:"Why not use the funding we would normally send to Mexico to take care of the mess? I bet Mexico would close their southern border pretty fast!

Or an alternative to that is the fact that the state dept. has lost 6 billion dollars that they can't account for. Why can't congress just tell Obama to find the 6billion and he can then use it however he wishes to use it. Also maybe the government can cut back on bonuses especially the bonuses handed out in the IRS and VA an it does seem that they did nothing to earn them.


Lets hold a referendum and all those who support Obama and his crises making admin should be forced to pay for it and leave the rest of us alone. Lets see who the hypocrites are.
I am sure Jazz,Dog and coaster would open their doors to the MS13 members as long as they have token children to cross the border with. Lets make it happen people!


Yes, and then we'll force the GOP to pay for the Iraq/Afghanistan wars they put on America's credit card, and for the subsequent Recession/financial meltdown they caused.

You know, REAL crises, and ones that cost Americans a heck of a lot more than the mini-crises that have occurred during the Obama years.

Apparently, there's plenty of hypocrisy to go around. At least Bush had the good sense to go quietly to his room and ponder just how horribly he screwed things up for America. Other Republicans should follow his lead, because seriously, the rest of us have NOT forgotten just how bad things were in 2007-2008.


That's fine by me, But remember Democrats also voted to go to war as well so you will just get doubled down on. Lets make it happen! You want it lets do it!
I vote third party moron so i will owe nothing for your stupidity.


Donegan..... dimwitted Dems forget the wars were voted on.... they only want to blame Bush


The Democrats voted on the information that the Bush administration fed them.

Too bad the information was lies.

The Big Dog's back

Oh boy,you struck a nerve with the right wingnuts that bush lied and fed info that were lies. Look right wingnuts, you own the Iraq war and the Great Recession. OWN UP TO IT!


The rightwing nuts ALWAYS leave that " lying " part out.


If they were dumb enough to be fooled by a idiot they should not be in office. Face it your gods are just as responsible for the wars as they voted for them.
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998. *

"Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
President Clinton, Jan. 27, 1998. * video

"Fateful decisions will be made in the days and weeks ahead. At issue is nothing less than the fundamental question of whether or not we can keep the most lethal weapons known to mankind out of the hands of an unreconstructed tyrant and aggressor who is in the same league as the most brutal dictators of this century."
Sen. Joe Biden (D, DE), Feb. 12, 1998 *

"It is essential that a dictator like Saddam not be allowed to evade international strictures and wield frightening weapons of mass destruction. As long as UNSCOM is prevented from carrying out its mission, the effort to monitor Iraqi compliance with Resolution 687 becomes a dangerous shell game. Neither the United States nor the global community can afford to allow Saddam Hussein to continue on this path."
Sen. Tom Daschle (D, SD), Feb. 12, 1998 *

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeleine Albright, Feb. 18, 1998. *

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb. 18, 1998. *

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998. *

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998. *

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeleine Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999. *

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL) and others, Dec, 5, 2001. *

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002. *

"We know that he has stored away secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. *

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. *

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002. *

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002. *

"My position is very clear: The time has come for decisive action to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. I'm a co-sponsor of the bipartisan resolution that's presently under consideration in the Senate. Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave threat to America and our allies..."
John Edwards (D, NC), Oct. 7, 2002 * video

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002. *

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years .... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002. *

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002. *

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct. 10, 2002. * video

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.
Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002. *

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
Funny how they all lied even before Bush was in office!


Dumbagain -

I'll repeat it again - slowly - because you are very slow witted :

"The Democrats voted on the information that the Bush administration fed them."

Funny how truth kinda rattles your world , isnt it ?


It wasn't true? Hmmm, I served in Iraq during the war and I can assure you plenty of chemical weapons were found. The problem? The media didn't report it.


Ask a 101st Mountain Division soldier about what they found.


LMAO! I would but there is no such unit as the 101st Mountain Division and hasn't been for decades. Moron.


The ONLY place a 101st Mountain division appears is on some video game. That is the quality of information you can expect from jazzbo.


...and the only place where you see yourself as a great intellectual is in your mind.


Nope just someone who has learned the lessen to check my facts before writing them down. it takes little time and prevents looking like a fool when the truth is then brought up. Is it that you enjoy looking like a fool? or do you just not learn from your past mistakes? Tis why I link to what proves my statements so often. You might expect people on an anonymous news blog to accept everything you say to be the truth, but as has been shown, it ain't that way in real life.