President Donald Trump and his deputies have a major sales job ahead of them on Capitol Hill as multiple GOP lawmakers questioned a proposed $1 billion in Secret Service security spending that could be used at least in part for Trump’s controversial White House ballroom project.
The provision, which gives $1 billion to the Secret Service for “security adjustments and upgrades,” has threatened to overshadow what Republicans wanted to make the main focus of the package — tens of billions of dollars in new immigration enforcement funding. But the White House and many lawmakers argue the funding is necessary after the shooting at last month’s White House Correspondents Dinner.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune defended the funding’s inclusion Monday and predicted that most GOP senators will ultimately vote to support what the Secret Service says it needs.
“They have a job to do, and we want to make sure they’re able to do their job effectively so that we keep the president of the United States safe,” Thune said. “So I think most of our members are — if they are getting briefed on what the money is going to be used for — are probably going to be in a good place.”
Secret Service Director Sean Curran is expected to discuss the request at the Senate GOP’s closed-door lunch Tuesday, according to three people granted anonymity to disclose private scheduling.
GOP leaders are hoping to have the bill on the Senate floor next week, after votes in the Senate Homeland Security and Budget committees.
Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who has emerged as a pivotal vote, was among several Republicans who said they needed more information, with Tillis telling reporters he was “looking forward to seeing the details this week.”
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who chairs the Homeland Security panel, said Monday that he does not support the funding’s inclusion in the bill. He cannot act directly to strike it since the Secret Service provision is not in the portion of the bill under his committee, but he said it was a “possibility” it gets stripped out before it hits the floor.
“I’m not sure it’s anything we’ll ever vote on,” Paul said, while declining to say how he would vote if it stays in: “We’ll see if it gets to that.”
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), who could block the funding as a member of the Budget Committee, declined to comment multiple times Monday on the decision to include White House security funding. He previously wanted to expand the scope of the party-line bill, but leaders rejected his push, arguing it needed to be focused solely on immigration enforcement.
Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine), who is in a difficult reelection campaign, said “I don’t know” if the $1 billion is for the ballroom itself and wanted clarification during Tuesday’s closed-door lunch.
“Obviously, there have been three or four attempts on the president’s life, and that’s extremely serious, and we’re in a heightened era of political violence, but the ballroom itself should be paid for by private donations, as the president had indicated,” Collins said.
To get the ballroom-related language through the full Senate on party lines, as expected, Thune can lose no more than three Republicans, with Vice President JD Vance breaking a tie.
Senate Democrats are preparing to argue the provision is an impermissibly narrow “earmark” that doesn’t comply with the strict rules governing the budget reconciliation process, which is how Republicans are aiming to sidestep a Democratic filibuster. Conversations with parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough are underway as of Monday, according to three people granted anonymity to disclose the private discussions.
MacDonough’s rulings on the reconciliation process tend to be final, and if she says the provision is in compliance, Senate Democrats are expected to then force a floor vote to strip it out.
Among the Republican senators being closely watched are Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Paul, who both opposed a preliminary measure setting out the fiscal blueprint for the immigration enforcement bill. Paul said earlier this year that he would support approving the ballroom through reconciliation but warned he supported putting in only a “nominal” amount of taxpayer money for the project, which Trump has said will be privately financed.
The challenges in the House are no less daunting, with Speaker Mike Johnson working with a razor-thin vote margin. Just getting the budget blueprint approved was a grueling process that culminated in a vote that was left open for more than five hours as Johnson scrambled to resolve unrelated policy fights among Republicans.
Now a growing group of House Republicans is privately complaining to their leaders about the White House security money that can be used on the ballroom, arguing it sends a tone-deaf message as voters struggle with higher gas and grocery prices.
“It’s a bad look. It’s bad timing. It’s bad all around,” another House Republican said.
Some House GOP leaders privately doubt the measure has the votes to pass, according to four people granted anonymity to describe behind-the-scenes discussions, but they’re hoping it gets stripped out in the Senate first.
Trump has said he wants the immigration enforcement funding on his desk by June 1, and House leaders are scrambling to make that happen next week before a planned Memorial Day recess. They have already started discussing the potential need to keep the House in session for at least part of the holiday weekend.
Curran and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin have already started their sales pitch, sending a letter last week to top House and Senate Republicans laying out in broad strokes how the funding would be used.
“The $1 billion in funding included in the reconciliation bill will assist the USSS in delivering critical security upgrades at the White House to minimize threats, including the security components to the East Wing Modernization Project, in addition to other critical missions for the USSS,” they wrote.
Still, some Republicans facing tough midterm campaigns are publicly apprehensive.
“Listen, I want to see the details,” Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.) said last week. “I want to know exactly what those dollars are going for, what are the security measures put in place … and then how they came to that figure.”
Rep. Jen Kiggans, another vulnerable Virginia House Republican, said she would not be “speculating” on the request. But, she added, “I look forward to getting back to Washington and working through that process.”
Rep. Mike Haridopolos (R-Fla.), a staunch Trump ally, said in an interview Monday that he was “not going to make a decision till I know all the facts,” while voicing some support for having a secure location for the president, members of Congress and White House guests to gather.
“All I’ve seen is $1 billion dollars,” he said, adding that he might be convinced if administration officials “walk through why it’s justified.”
Calen Razor contributed to this report.
Read the full article here