House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune are openly clashing over Homeland Security funding, complicating Republicans' path out of the 72-day shutdown.
Why it matters: Thune is unlikely to say it publicly, but frustration is running high among Senate Republicans over Johnson's failure to pass a DHS appropriations bill that cleared the Senate — twice.
- The two leaders began the month with a joint statement and a joint plan of action: fund ICE and Border Patrol through reconciliation, and the rest of DHS through the regular appropriations process.
- DHS has warned that its stopgap fund to pay staff will run out in the coming weeks.
Driving the news: Johnson (R-La.) is looking to modify the Senate-passed DHS bill to secure votes in the House. As written, it doesn't have the votes to pass until after a reconciliation bill is passed.
- "It has some problematic language because it was haphazardly drafted," Johnson said of the bill funding the non-immigration parts of DHS.
- "We have a modified version that I think is going to be much better for both chambers. It doesn't change most of the substance,' he said.
Moment laters, and a few hundred feet away, Thune (R-S.D.) was asked to respond. He was diplomatic, but his message was clear:
- "I think we did everything we can to ensure that everything is appropriately funded," he said.
Later, Thune seemed open to working with Johnson on how to alter the bill.
- "We're working with the House to see if there's a way to do that," Thune said.
Zoom in: The main point of contention in the House is around language that "zeroes out" funding for ICE and Border Patrol in the Senate-passed appropriations bill.
- A wide group of members want to strip that language from the Senate bill, avoiding taking a vote seen as defunding law enforcement.
- They're still considering waiting for the reconciliation process to be complete, and pairing a final vote on that with the DHS appropriations bill. But that would likely leave the department shutdown through mid-May.
Between the lines: Johnson appears to be signaling relatively minor edits — more of a stylistic rewrite than a substantive overhaul.
- Even small changes would require the Senate to take up and pass the bill again.
The bottom line: Both men are Republicans. Both are leaders. And both are staking out public positions that could make a private deal harder to reach.
