House passes spending package as Democrats split over ICE funding

WASHINGTON — A small group of moderate House Democrats joined with Republicans Thursday to pass a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security, overcoming a revolt by most Democrats angered by aggressive ICE operations in Minneapolis and other U.S. cities.

The vote was 220-207, with seven Democrats breaking with their party and voting yes. The House also passed a separate set of bills to fund other federal agencies in a broad bipartisan vote in an effort to avoid a partial government shutdown on Jan. 31.

In a twist, the House voted unanimously to add an amendment to the package repealing a Senate-crafted law that allows eight Republican senators to sue the government for a minimum of $500,000 in damages after their phone records were collected as part of a Jan. 6 investigation.

Lawmakers from both parties have criticized the law since it was passed two months ago as part of the deal to end the government shutdown. Thursday’s vote puts the Senate in a bind, forcing it to accept repeal or shut down the government next week, when the House is scheduled to be in recess.

The House combined the repeal amendment and six of its approved spending bills into one package. It now heads to the Senate, where Appropriations Committee leaders approved the funding deal. The package represents the final installment of 12 spending bills that Congress must pass each year to keep the government open, and it will fund it through the end of September.

House Republicans were in a celebratory mood after the vote, and aides were seen taking bottles of champagne to a private room just off the House floor.

“Despite the noise, despite our slim margins, despite the fact that most members of the House have never gone through a regular, member-driven appropriations process before, this team succeeded,” Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., flanked by his Republican Party colleagues, said at a news conference after the vote. “The House has now passed all 12 appropriations bills, the Senate will soon do the same and the President will sign them – what a concept.”

Some on the far left have called on Democrats to defund Immigration and Customs Enforcement after an ICE agent fatally shot Renee Good, a Minneapolis woman and U.S. citizen, this month.

And in a sign that the ICE issue has become a major political issue for Democrats, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., and his top lieutenants joined rank-and-file Democrats in voting no on the DHS funding bill, saying it lacked safeguards and accountability for ICE.

Liberal Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., one of the lead negotiators of the broader funding deal, also voted no on the DHS bill — an unusual move for the top funder of House Democrats.

Jeffries told reporters: “ICE is out of control and operates, in many ways, in an anarchic manner. » He accused ICE of “using taxpayer dollars to inflict brutality on the American people,” including killing Good “in cold blood.”

Leaders made the decision even after DeLauro and other top Democratic appropriators — who work closely with leaders — reached a bipartisan, bicameral deal to fund the government through fiscal year 2026, which ends Sept. 30.

“You have to ask each individual member who is going to vote in the best interest of their district why they chose to vote one way or the other,” Jeffries said when asked about the ICE decision.

The seven Democrats who voted in favor were: Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez, both of Texas; Jared Golden of Maine; Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez of Washington; Don Davis of North Carolina; and Laura Gillen and Tom Suozzi, both of New York.

Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky was the only Republican to vote no.

Some Democrats lamented that their party didn’t fight as hard for ICE safeguards as it did for an extension of Affordable Care Act funds, when they forced a 43-day shutdown last fall. (Eight Senate Democrats ultimately relented on the ACA without concessions.)

“Instead of explaining to the American people where we are, what the immigration system is and why it’s broken – it’s broken, but why it’s broken and what the solutions are – we just have a bunch of Democrats who have tried to be tougher on immigration than Republicans. It’s never worked,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash. “You can’t outsmart Republican Republicans, because you’re going to lose your base and you’re not going to convince any Republicans to join you.”

She said many Democrats were afraid to take pro-immigration positions after President Donald Trump used immigration in his 2024 election victory.

Jayapal suggested that DeLauro and Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., the two top Democratic donors, negotiated DHS funding as part of the broader bill because “they wanted to get all of this done. A lot of times, the donors — they just care about getting the bills passed.”

DeLauro and Murray pointed out that Democrats secured $20 million for body cameras for ICE personnel, as well as reductions in ICE funding for enforcement and deportation operations and the number of detention beds.

While most Democrats are cautious on immigration, others in the party are all-out against ICE as they seek to channel public backlash against the agency. Rep. Shri Thanedar, Democrat of Michigan, facing a fierce primary challenge from the left, has introduced repealing the ICE Act, which would dismantle the agency.

Meanwhile, Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill., this week introduced the MELT ICE Act, which would end DHS funding to detain or monitor immigrants and redirect that money to health care, housing and other social services in local communities.

Neither is likely to pass with Republican majorities in the House and Senate.

Murray, by contrast, focused on a series of victories she said Democrats won in the broader context of government funding, including funding for child care, housing assistance, mental health and Pell Grants — in many cases beating Trump’s proposed cuts.

“We need to do a lot more to get DHS under control, which I will continue to push for,” Murray said. “But the hard truth is that Democrats must win political power to implement the kind of accountability we need. »