Saving an Israel-Ukraine Deal May Require Senate Agreement on Border Reform

While much of the debate over President Joe Biden's $106 billion aid request has centered around his decision to link funding for Israel and Ukraine into a single package, another issue is becoming increasingly central to the president's request—addressing migration at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Republican Leader Mitch McConnell has come into conflict with conservatives and House Speaker Mike Johnson over his agreement with Biden to see a future aid request offer funding for both Israel and Ukraine despite Johnson pushing to handle the issues separately.

However, McConnell has made clear that he will only be able to provide Democrats the GOP votes needed to overcome the 60-vote filibuster threshold if liberals are willing to go beyond the $13.6 billion for border funding in Biden's request and accept substantive policy changes to stem the historic flow of migrants at the border.

"Democrats will have to accept a really serious U.S.-Mexico border protection bill in order to get our people on board for a comprehensive approach," McConnell said in his Tuesday press conference.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has pushed back on the idea including border policy changes in the package, stressing the need to focus on providing funding to Ukraine and Israel which face mounting wars. Introducing policy changes could lead to complicated negotiations which could delay passage of the aid package during a crucial time in which America faces a November 17 government funding deadline that could result in a shutdown if unaddressed.

However, if Republicans hold firm in their desire to see substantive policy changes introduced, Texas Senator John Cornyn, an ally of GOP leadership, offered insight on where negotiations with Democrats could start.

"The single most important thing is to end catch and release," Cornyn told Newsweek. "That's just an example, but there'll be a list of things that we think will slow the flow, so to speak."

"Catch and release" is a pejorative term referring to a collection of policies whereby detained migrants deemed to be low risk and generally seeking asylum are freed from detention and permitted to reside in American communities while awaiting their court dates.

However, according to Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), America faces an immigration court backlog of nearly 2.1 million cases, meaning migrants can wind up living in the U.S. for significant amounts of time prior to their cases being heard.

Cornyn said addressing "catch and release" could happen through a variety of different ways. He said one example would be a policy of denying asylum to individuals who have left their country and already passed through a safe country, where they could have requested asylum, on their way to the U.S.

Oklahoma Senator James Lankford, the top Republican on the Subcommittee on Government Operations and Border Management, who is leading discussions on border policy reforms, agreed that addressing "catch and release" stands as a top priority.

Asked by Newsweek how he views the policy and its place in negotiations, Lankford said that it is of "high priority for everybody," including the Biden administration and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

"The length of time between the decision that's made and the actual action is so far, you don't feel the consequences," Lankford said. "If you don't feel the consequences, you don't think there are consequences, so the administration will also say, 'we got to find a way to make it tighter between you actually don't qualify for asylum and you're actually returned.'"

In wake of the end of the Title 42 public health order that allowed for the expulsion of migrants without processing, Lankford said America's immigration court system is under increasing strain. This means individuals who enter the country illegally but present asylum claims have more time to build lives in America free of consequences, even if their claim is ultimately deemed illegitimate, due to lengthy processing times.

Speaking more broadly to reporters about the negotiations, Lankford said he's spoken with Democratic colleagues about the border policy effort, but that it has largely remained between Republicans for now. He declined to "go into details" on specifics, saying "it's just not time yet." He emphasized, however, that potential actions will take DHS' stated needs into account.

Democrats remain skeptical that Republicans can bring forth a substantive bipartisan deal given the amount of time remaining between now and the government shutdown deadline.

Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy, who in January traveled with Lankford and other Senators from both parties to the border, told Newsweek he's "open to talking" and has been "listening" to his Republican colleagues, but holds concerns about the timeframe. However, he believes "there's absolutely the ability for the two parties to come together on immigration reform."

Another senator who attended the January border trip and has been active on the issue is Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona. He has been critical of the Biden administration's handling of the situation in the past, and told Newsweek that the border presents a "never ending crisis," but said the GOP's solution offered earlier this year runs "counter to our history as a country of immigrants."

In May, House Republicans passed H.R. 2, The Secure the Border Act, which did not receive a single Democratic vote. The bill proposed funding for border agents, upgrades to border technology, and a resumption of construction of the border wall. On the immigration front, it controversially called to reinstate the Trump-era "Remain in Mexico" policy and placed additional restrictions on asylum seekers, while providing new requirements to E-Verify, an employment eligibility database.

"On the border security piece of this, there's a ton we have to do, technology, some barriers where they make sense — I added four pieces of border fencing consistent with what the last administration did over four different areas because it was important to border patrol," Kelly told Newsweek. "I think there could be [policy changes], but if we're talking about the bulk of what was in H.R. 2, a lot of that's a non-starter."

Kelly said he's been in conversation with Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Gary Peters of Michigan about border security needs. Peters, in his capacity as committee chair, released a policy proposal with Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin of Illinois in May offering proposed solutions to America's border security and immigration problems.

Despite it receiving the support of 12 other Democratic-aligned senators, the effort has not moved forward. Peters notes that his committee has also advanced other bills, with bipartisan support, aimed at addressing border security issues. When asked whether those bills have served as negotiating points with Republicans, Peters told Newsweek, "I'd say they're discussions. They're hard discussions, I'll put it that way."