Sequester offers leverage for wall funds

The Daily Reflector ^ | Feb 14, 2019 | Marc Thiessen

[Yosemitest]

Washington Post columnist Marc A. Thiessen served as a speechwriter for President George W. Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

It's official.
We just had the longest government shutdown in history over nothing.

Democrats have agreed to fund $1.375 billion for 55 miles of physical barrier along the border,
which is only a little more than what Trump would have gotten under a continuing resolution that funded the government at current levels —
and far less than the $5.7 billion he demanded to build 230 miles of barriers
that experts and the Department of Homeland Security said they need to secure the border.

But Trump can still get the rest of the money —
without a government shutdown or declaring a national emergency.

Shutting down the government again isn't an option.
Democrats are not afraid of another shutdown.
They know if Trump rejects this deal and closes the government, he would get the blame,
and in a few weeks' time we would end right up back where we are now —
with a bad deal.
They have zero incentive to give him more money for a border wall.

Declaring a national emergency would also be a mistake.
Trump could face a rebellion within his own party, and rightly so.
An emergency declaration is intended for actual emergencies —
such as the 9/11 terrorist attacks or Hurricane Katrina.
If Trump declares an emergency to circumvent Congress and build his wall,
then a left-wing president could use that precedent one day to declare climate change a national emergency
and implement the Green New Deal.
Besides, the courts would likely enjoin his emergency declaration, tying up wall money for months if not years.

To win, Trump needs to shift the debate to a place where he has real leverage:
using the threat of a sequester, rather than a shutdown,
to force the Democrats to give him his border barrier.
In 10 months' time, if Congress fails to act,
then an automatic sequester will kick in
that would reduce federal spending in 2020 to levels
that Congress and President Barack Obama set in the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Congress agreed to lift those spending caps for two years in 2018,
increasing both defense and nondefense discretionary spending above sequester levels by $165 billion and $131 billion, respectively.
But that deal runs out at the end of the year.
If Congress does not lift the caps by December,
then automatic $55 billion across-the-board cuts to domestic discretionary spending will take place,
while defense spending will be cut by $71 billion.


That looming deadline gives Trump leverage he needs to get his wall.
Democrats may not fear another shutdown,
but will they really sacrifice $55 billion for domestic priorities next year
just to deny Trump a measly $5.7 billion for a physical border barrier ?
Unlikely.

If anything, Democrats want to use their new House majority to demand significant increases to domestic spending.
Denying Trump his wall in December would lead to severe cuts.
And Democrats would hardly have grounds on which to complain,
since Trump would simply be following the terms of a budget deal
that a Democratic-controlled Senate passed and Obama signed into law.

Of course, the defense cuts were intended as a deterrent to conservatives,
who know they would be potentially disastrous for U.S. national security.
But Trump may not care.
He wants his wall and may be willing to swallow temporary defense cuts to inflict sufficient pain on the Democrats to get it. <>br>
Trump can't win a shutdown fight today.
But he can win a sequester fight at the end of the year.
He should
take the deal on the table today,
resist the temptation to invoke a national emergency
and then get the rest of his wall money in December
when he finally has the upper hand.

[Yosemitest]

Rush Limbaugh, you need to read this.
I'd like to hear what you think about the Sequester Option.
Without either a shutdown ,or declaring a National Emergency, this THIRD OPTION might be the best option.

But I disagree with the author, Mr. Marc Thiessen.
This Immigration of ILLEGAL ALIENS IS a National Emergency, and so is the ILLEGAL DRUGS they bring into this country across the southern border.

[spokeshave]

while defense spending will be cut by $71 billion.

I think this is the deal breaker

[Reno89519]

I’m trying to figure out the “Art of the Deal” WIN since every step is less money offered. There was $25 billion on the table, then something else, then 1.6, now 1.375 and it goes on, inter-mixed with $0. Wow, I’d like a marathon negotiation with Trump to buy one of his properties. Maybe if I hold out long enough he’ll just give it to me for the change in my pocket. That seems like that is where he’s heading with these negotiations.

[originalbuckeye]

And that poison pill of the Mayors having control......wouldn’t Eminent Domain kick in here?

[Reno89519]

It is a national emergency but not treated as one. If it were recognized as one, an emergency would already be declared, then demand for congress to do something, else he would. Or, maybe close the border? Put troops to secure it? Do something, action not words, to make clear it is an emergency. What we seem to have is a wet noodle response for political points. Maybe Trump needs to send Ivanka and Jared to Israel for a few months, or Antarctica, and listen to concerned Americans, the ones who voted for him.

[yoe]

"They have zero incentive to give him more money for a border wall.">

Not "they" but Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer who continue to play politics with the security of this nation.

Go For The Gold Mr. President and take the money you need to secure our borders; protecting our country is Constitutionally correct. What sleazes Pelosi and Schumer are!

[trebb]

My bet is that this is not news to President Trump and he is looking at all options to keep his promises...he doesn’t need the job for personal wealth and power so i trust his judgement even when my mind wishes it could be done as quickly and easily as so many here seem to have deluded themselves into “winking” (combination of “wish” and “thinking”)...

[VTenigma]

Trump may well find the “other money” but the poison pills in this CR will enjoin him from using it. No go, VETO.

[SteveH]

a lot of caravans could happen between now and then

[Wizdum]

The problem I have is the increase in Catch and Release. As written this bill is a big loser for and further support for Immigration law enforcement.
There are other monies available to the POTUS to get the wall built. California owes the US gov't 3.5 billion for the failed bullet train. Federlize the NG and have them build the California portion of the wall.....send the bill to the CA legislature.

[Pearls Before Swine]

Democrats may not fear another shutdown, but will they really sacrifice $55 billion for domestic priorities next year just to deny Trump a measly $5.7 billion for a physical border barrier ?

They just might, if they can also get a $71 billion cut in defense. They hate the country that much. And, in their view, that $71 billion can be re-directed (eventually) to a "peace dividend", i.e., liberal wish-project spending.

[Lurkinanloomin]

Bush League Republicans are just as big a problem as Democrats.

[Yosemitest]

Funny how Trump almost always comes out on top, yet he never goes under financially.
If he has to declare bankruptcy, someone else always goes under.

I'm not a fan of Trump, but he's accomplishing a lot of good for the United States.
Now rumors have it, that there's several 'poison pills' in what's being offered to make Trump Veto the deal.
Check out Rush yesterday on

My Prediction: El Trumpo Will Sign the Bill and Declare an Emergency.
...
RUSH: ... Anyway, one more bite here, and this is from Chuck You Schumer.
This is interesting.
Schumer yesterday and then again today really, really, really begging Trump to sign this,
really trying to goad Trump into signing this.
And let’s listen to the bite, and I will analyze this after it finishes.
This is today from Schumer on the Senate floor.

SCHUMER: President Trump, sign this bill.
Neither side got everything it wanted in this bill,
but both sides want to avoid another shutdown.
It provides additional funding for smart, effective border security.
Let me repeat that.
It does not fund the president’s wall,
but it does fund border security that both parties support.
So I repeat my request.
President Trump, say you’ll sign this bill.
Remove the axe hanging over everyone’s head.
President Trump, in politics, to quote the Rolling Stones,
you can’t always get what you want.

RUSH: I’d much rather hear the Stones sing that
than to listen to Schumer say it.
“You can’t always get what you want,” because I’m [Schumer] still here.
So what is Chuck You actually doing ?
You notice here that Chuck You goes to great lengths to tell everybody that
there isn’t any money for the wall in here,
this is smart border security,
but there isn’t any money for the wall.
“It does not fund the president’s wall.”

I think he’s trying to goad Trump into not signing this.
“Mr. President, please sign this, please.”
I think he’s trying to goad him into NOT signing.
I think Schumer is trying to engineer what he thinks would be another big win-win with another shutdown.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: “Rush, did I hear right ?
You think the president’s gonna sign this ?”
Yes. I think he’s gonna sign it.
I don’t think the president wants to wait 20 years to build a wall.
He doesn’t want it to wait four years.
He wants to build the wall.
He wants to get it down now.
There isn’t gonna be another government shutdown.
There’s no leverage to do that.
There’s no sense in (sigh) NOT signing this to try to defeat the Democrats.
The objective here is
to get the wall built,
and I think he’s gonna sign it. I think he’s gonna do or declare a national emergency at some point in this.

They’ve amassed a bunch of money that they can use to complete these border wall projects that they want,
and I think that’s what’s gonna happen.
This is my wild guess.
Well, it’s a little bit more than that, but it’s still a guess.
It’s a prediction of what’s gonna happen.
I wouldn’t be sidetracked by
the $1.375 billion in terms of IF Trump signed it,
it means he’s accepting it.
It doesn’t mean that at all.

It doesn’t mean,
“Oh, well. If that’s all I can get,
that’s all I can get;
I’ll take it.”

That’s not what signing this would mean in any stretch of the imagination.
I think there’s a lot of factors going into this.
I think he’s as committed to getting this wall built as he ever was
and is gonna see to it that it happens, however it needs to happen.
He’s gonna find the money for it elsewhere.
If they have to challenge him in the court system to try to shut him down,
they’ll do that.
I think they’ve got a plan ready to go —
it would be silly if they didn’t
— that could accommodate pretty much every attempt the Democrats make.

Remember, every effort the Democrats make to stop the enactment of border security is a plus when it comes…
I don’t know how many Americans are in favor of
wide-open borders or no borders,
just let anybody who wants to come in.
I know there are some,
but I know there are not enough of those people to elect anybody president.

If the Democrats want to own that position,
then maneuver them into it and let them have it.
I think that’s the objective here that will be met along with getting the wall built.
I’ve never been more certain of Trump’s commitment to this than I am today,
than I was yesterday, when this whole thing came up.
I think he’s every bit as committed to this as he was in June in 2015
when he came down the escalator and announced his attentions regarding this.

My first instincts are to VETO that bill, but I'm not a legislator, and I'm not running for office.
The DemocRATS .... uh, I mean the Devil's in the details, and we don't have the details yet.
Negotiations are still going on.

[HotHunt]

I thought I read yesterday that Trump was unhappy with this deal and said he had other places to get the money from. IIR a figure of $23 billion was mentioned. Anybody else know what was said?

This sequester deal seems to iffy to me. democRATS will be RATS and take the low road somehow. December is a long way off to keep the subject of illegal immigration at the forefront of the public's interest.

The best idea I've heard so far is from Ted Cruz. Take the $14 billion in seized assets from convicted Mexican drug lord, EL Chapo, and use it to fund building the wall. Seized assets flow back to the DOJ don't they? Trump oversees the DOJ.

And Trump can even keep his promise that Mexico paid for the wall.

A twofer. Easy peasy.

[Yosemitest]

Eminent Domain SHOULD kick in there.
But there would be MORE TIME WAISTED if he uses that, waisted in court battles.

[gibsonguy]

” but the poison pills in this CR will enjoin him from using it”

Do we know that is in there? That is, language that specifically forbids Trump using other monies to build the wall? Trump let Ryan get away with that BS after Ryan promised there would be money for the wall in the next bill.

[Yosemitest]

"They just might, if they can also get a $71 billion cut in defense.
They hate the country that much. "

I agree that they would be very much likely to want to cut defense by that much ... or more.

[Yosemitest]

I like Ted Cruz's plan.
It's simple and IT WORKS !

"Anybody else know what was said ?"

But all that matters is what's WRITTEN in that bill.

QUESTION FOR ANYONE:

How many days can a bill awaiting the President's signature, or his VETO , before it becomes law WITHOUT his signature,
and it is designated 'signed' ?

[jjotto]

US Constitution Article 1, Section 7

10 days

[wastedyears]

So an invasion isn’t an emergency?