On Friday’s broadcast of Bloomberg’s “Balance of Power,” Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) responded to a question on ensuring that TSA, FEMA, and the Coast Guard get funding even if there is a DHS shutdown by stating that “What I support is making sure we have a comprehensive agreement to ensure that we rein ICE in and make sure that their abusive practices stop.” She also stated that legislation to ensure funding for TSA, FEMA, and the Coast Guard isn’t needed and “I don’t know that, at the moment, I want to give any more money to Kristi Noem.”
Co-host Joe Mathieu asked, [relevant exchange begins around 8:35] “I wonder your thoughts on this idea that’s come forth from the Ranking Member on the Appropriations Committee, upon which you serve, Rep. Rosa DeLauro’s (D-CT) got a funding deal that would basically carve out ICE. It would fund the TSA, it would fund FEMA, it would fund the Coast Guard. It would put ICE in a box, knowing that ICE has gobs of money from the big, beautiful bill. Is that a good idea to spare TSA, FEMA, and the others while this is worked out?”
Wasserman Schultz answered, “The big, ugly law, the reconciliation law that passed last summer, basically has a slush fund, billions of dollars, that the administration is able to use. They can transfer that funding to the Coast Guard and FEMA and TSA. They have the flexibility, all the flexibility they need. What we need to do is have a comprehensive agreement that ensures that we rein ICE in, that they aren’t abusing constitutional and human rights.”
Mathieu followed up, “So, as long as the parties are oceans apart here, though, Congresswoman, would you support this idea of preserving funding for TSA and FEMA while ICE is put on ice?”
Wasserman Schultz responded, “What I support is making sure we have a comprehensive agreement to ensure that we rein ICE in and make sure that their abusive practices stop. … I don’t think that the Ranking Member, who I respect, she is my Ranking Member, I’m on the Appropriations Committee, I don’t think it’s necessary for us to take that action, because the administration has the flexibility to continue to fund those three components of the Department of Homeland Security. And, frankly, I don’t know that, at the moment, I want to give any more money to Kristi Noem.”
Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett
Read the full article here