Nonprofits supporting Democrats’ anti-DHS funding efforts have skin in game

U.S. Capitol; Carol M. Highsmith

U.S. Capitol Building by Carol M. Highsmith/U.S. Library of Congress Digital Collection

The battle continues over H.R. 240, the bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives to fund the Department of Homeland Security. Minority leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) lined up Democrat-allied nonprofits in an effort to kill the bill.

Democrats, perhaps feeling the sting of the loss of absolute power, and progressive leaders in the Senate have successfully blocked the bill, even shutting down any debate. It is obvious Democrats do not want Americans to know why they are blocking a bill that is in many ways liberal.

A number of the nonprofits listed on Pelosi’s page have skin in the game, courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer.  


The critical factor in the bill involves an illicit action—President Barack Obama’s executive branch legislation on what he refers to as “immigration reform.” A president cannot write legislation, and in a government respectful of law, this matter would not even be in contention.

Obama now claims he has power for executive action to advance pardons for millions of people who have not been charged with a crime and then prohibit the government from deporting anyone in the entire population. It goes without saying that an immigration system politicos repeatedly call “broken” cannot safely vet millions en masse, all the while telling immigrants who come here legally to go to the back of the line.

Obama has admitted at least 15 times—in public—that he does not have the authority to take the steps that he is taking.

It is imperative that Republicans not fund the president’s mandate. To do so would set a precedent that jeopardizes the future of the country in more ways than one. By the standard this president has established, a president can do anything he wants to.

Any American, regardless of political affiliation, should have concerns about this type of overreach. It is unprecedented. Even legal scholars who are left of center have pointed out that fact.


President George W. Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” followed a pattern of channeling federal funding to faith-based groups as well as to ethnic groups. Obama has continued and in some cases expanded that pattern.

On her “leadership” page at the U.S. House, Pelosi listed a number of faith-based and other groups who oppose the Republican bill. If you compare a list of groups receiving millions in federal funding for refugees or immigration matters with the list Pelosi placed on her page, you will see matches. Catholic and Lutheran groups as well as the ethnic-advocacy group La Raza all have received federal funds tied to immigration matters, including refugees. The conflict of interest should be apparent.

Pelosi does not disclose the levels of funding the groups receive. If she were ethical, she would do so. If media had not transformed to a de facto lobby for progressive causes, questions would be asked.


H.R. 240 is currently being blocked by the same Democrats who broke protocol to pass the massive healthcare tax bill not one Republican voted for. Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, not willing perhaps to use the same trickery his counterpart Sen. Harry Reid did when Democrats had absolute control, has called for debate:

“For two full weeks, Democrats have prevented the Senate from even considering legislation to fund the Department of Homeland Security. Democrats won’t allow the Senate to even debate this funding. Democrats won’t allow the Senate to even consider amendments to this funding.

Democrats appear willing to do anything and everything they can to prevent the Senate from taking any action to fund Homeland Security. And all to defend ‘unwise and unfair’ overreach.”


Speaker John Boehner provided highlights from the bill:

–Funding for Customs and Border Protection ($10.7 billion) increased by $118.7 million—“the largest operational force levels in history”; provides for testing of a biometric exit mobile application for surveillance “around the clock”.

–Funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement ($5.96 billion) incrased by $689.4 million. The bill increased family detention capacity (3,372 beds).

–Funding for the Coast Guard that is actually more than Obama requested.

One amendment points out how the president’s action disfavors legal immigrants and workers as well as citizens because of the healthcare tax mandate. An employer does not have to provide insurance to the massive group politicians refer to as “DREAMers.” That means hiring such an individual would present cost-savings to an employer, disadvantaging legal immigrants and citizens seeking jobs.

The bill also stipulates increased transparency on the part of DHS.

Republicans expect Democrats to win the messaging war as legacy newspapers, TV networks, and magazines line up to attack the bill the majority of them have likely not read. Whether Pelosi and her Democrats read it is not known.

The truth, however, is that Democrats are lining up behind the president to support an illegal action by the executive branch. Regardless of who sits in the Oval Office, no president should be encouraged to write legislation that is not permitted by U.S. law.

No Democrat has explained how an action that is not a law but amounts to a bill that will produce revenue in the form of fees can be legal. To expect the House to fund an illegal bill is to ask the House to break federal law.

Those matters should be addressed by any media claiming to be objective, and if those matters are not addressed, the media outlet should be added to Pelosi’s list of supporters.

For an idea of the challenge the current open border policies present, take a look at page after page of criminal cases listed at ICE.

For an idea of the challenge open borders present to employers, see a previous column at Day on the Day about the catch-22 companies find themselves in—they’re damned if they do and damned if they don’t.

On Fox News on Sunday, Chris Wallace passively chastised Boehner for passing a bill he knew the president would not sign.

What Wallace did not note is that the president sparked the controversy first, writing a bill he knew Republicans would not sign, and the president’s bill far exceeded executive powers.

(Commentary by Kay B. Day/Feb. 16, 2016)

Please help us continue to keep our site online by donating a small amount via the PayPal link in the right column. We don’t run ads from major search engines on this site. Follow us on Twitter @DayontheDay.

About Kay Day

Kay B. Day is a freelance writer who has published in national and international magazines and websites. The author of 3 books, her work is anthologized in textbooks and collections. She has won awards for poetry, nonfiction and fiction. Day is a member of the American Society of Journalists and Authors and the Authors Guild.
This entry was posted in Congress, Immigration, Obama and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Nonprofits supporting Democrats’ anti-DHS funding efforts have skin in game

  1. Pingback: Federal ruling: Legal victory for global warmists helped upend Obama amnesty | DAY ON THE DAY

Sound off!