House votes to reopen the government, with 5 Republicans backing bill with no wall funds


On Thursday night, the newly sworn-in House passed a package of bills that would reopen the federal government, one funding just the Department of Homeland Security through Feb. 8 and the others financing the remaining shuttered federal agencies for the rest of the fiscal year. About a quarter of the government has been shut down since Dec. 22. Five Republicans joined all Democrats to pass the DHS bill, which does not include money for President Trump's border wall, 239-192, and two more Republicans joined in to fund the departments of Agriculture, State, Justice, Interior, and others closed for 13 days and counting.
President Trump reiterated that he would veto any bill that does not fund his proposed border wall. "You can call it a barrier, you can call it whatever you want," Trump said in brief surprise remarks in the White House briefing room, but "without a wall you cannot have border security." New House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told reporters Thursday night that Senate Republicans should "take 'yes' for an answer" and pass the bill, adding, "We are sending them back exactly, word for word, what they have passed" in December. "We're not doing a wall. Does anyone have any doubt that we're not doing a wall?" Pelosi said, calling Trump's proposal "a wall between reality and his constituents."
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has been adamant that the Senate won't take up any funding legislation that Trump won't publicly commit to signing, but two Senate Republicans up for re-election in 2020 broke with him Thursday. "I'm not saying their whole plan is a valid plan, but I see no reason why the bills that are ready to go and on which we've achieved an agreement should be held hostage to this debate over border security," said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) said work on border security "should be done when the government is fully open."
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Peter has worked as a news and culture writer and editor at The Week since the site's launch in 2008. He covers politics, world affairs, religion and cultural currents. His journalism career began as a copy editor at a financial newswire and has included editorial positions at The New York Times Magazine, Facts on File, and Oregon State University.
-
Trump's LA deployment in limbo after court rulings
Speed Read Judge Breyer ruled that Trump's National Guard deployment to Los Angeles was an 'illegal' overreach. But a federal appellate court halted the ruling.
-
Marines, National Guard in LA can detain Americans
speed read The troops have been authorized to detain anyone who interferes with immigration raids
-
Trump vows 'very big force' against parade protesters
Speed Read The parade, which will shut down much of the capital, will celebrate the US Army's 250th anniversary and Trump's 79th birthday
-
Smithsonian asserts its autonomy from Trump
speed read The DC institution defied Trump's firing of National Portrait Gallery Director Kim Sajet
-
Trump sends Marines to LA, backs Newsom arrest
speed read California Gov. Gavin Newsom is filing lawsuits in response to Trump's escalation of the federal response to ICE protests
-
Musk: What did he achieve in Washington?
Feature Elon Musk leaves his government job but not after bruising his image, slashing aid and firing thousands
-
Trump foists National Guard on unwilling California
speed read Protests erupted over ICE immigration raids in LA county
-
Supreme Court lowers bar in discrimination cases
speed read The court ruled in favor of a white woman who claimed she lost two deserved promotions to gay employees