Should the US government’s budget focus more on border control and less on welfare programs?

Government Operations (e.g., Election Laws) National Security and Defense Social Welfare
setting forth the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025... (S.Con.Res. 7)
This bill has Passed the Senate
Bill Summary

This resolution establishes the congressional budget for the US government from fiscal years 2025 to 2034. Some key aspects of the resolution include recommended levels and amounts for these fiscal years, specifically for new budget authority, outlays, direct spendings, revenues, deficits, and surpluses. Furthermore, it also provides outlines for reconciliation for legislation that increases or decreases the deficit for specified amounts, facilitating the passage of certain budgetary legislation through a streamlined process. One of the most significant changes in funding from past years will be the 175 billion dollar increase for border control. Sponsor: Senator Lindsey Graham (Republican, South Carolina)
View full bill text ➔

How do you feel?

You can still save your opinion to your scorecard, but since the vote has already taken place, your opinion won't be sent to your lawmakers.
Oppose Support

Opponents say

•      "Voted no on the Graham Budget tonight because the unstated purpose is to increase spending by $342 billion.." Source: Senator Rand Paul (Republican, Kentucky)


•      "The revised Cassidy-Graham legislation would: Eliminate the ACA’s Medicaid expansion and ACA’s marketplace subsidies in 2020 and replace them with an inadequate block grant.  Under our estimates, the block grant would provide about $239 billion less between 2020 and 2026 than projected federal spending for the Medicaid expansion and marketplace subsidies under current law, with the cut reaching $40 billion (16 percent) in 2026.  The block grant would not adjust based on changes in states’ funding needs, and it could be spent on virtually any health care purpose, with no requirement to offer low- and moderate-income people coverage or financial assistance.  And, as noted, the block grant would disappear altogether in 2027. Cap and cut federal Medicaid per-beneficiary funding for tens of millions of seniors, people with disabilities, and families with children starting in 2020.  Instead of the existing federal-state financial partnership, under which the federal government pays a fixed percentage of a state’s Medicaid costs, Cassidy-Graham would cap federal Medicaid funding at a set amount per beneficiary, irrespective of states’ actual costs.  The cap would grow more slowly each year than the projected growth in state per-beneficiary costs.  Prior CBO estimates suggest that Cassidy-Graham would thus cut the rest of Medicaid (outside the expansion) by at least $170 billion between 2020 and 2026, with the cuts reaching at least $38 billion (8 percent) by 2026, relative to current law.[2]  That would result in a combined cut to federal funding for health coverage of roughly $78 billion in 2026." Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities


Proponents say

•      "To my House colleagues: I prefer one big beautiful bill that makes the tax cuts permanent, that does the things we need to do on the border and with our military, and cuts spending. I wish you all the best. I prefer what you’re doing to what we’re doing. But we have to have a Plan B if you can’t get it done soon. Democrats used this very process to pass Obamacare and the Inflation Reduction Act. We’re going to use it to secure our border. [This resolution] allows the Judiciary Committee and the Homeland Security Committee to come up with a… $175 billion plan to secure our border… Those two committees will work with the Trump Administration to meet their priorities. here’s $150 billion in increased defense spending. Why? Because we have a lot of threats. This idea that there is somehow money in this resolution for Ukraine… is not true… It’s up to the [authorizing] committees as to what is in the… package. To all my colleagues here, you’ll eventually get to vote on that work product. We’re telling the Armed Services Committee, spend $150 billion the way you see fit [to bolster the U.S. military]. We’re telling two committees to spend $175 billion [total] to secure our border. And we’re telling seven other committees find savings inside your committee to offset the spending we’re creating in this bill. I think they can do that. I think what DOGE is doing is good. This is a form of that. Every committee that’s been instructed to save at least $1 billion will be able – finally – to…reduce spending because we are directing them to." Source: Senator Lindsey Graham (Republican, South Carolina)


•      "We're one step closer to fixing a problem that all Americans want us to fix I think. The man who murdered Laken Riley was released from detention because we had no bed space. That should never happen again. $175 billion in this bill to make sure we've got enough bed space, we complete finish the wall and kick gang members and other criminals out of the country. $150 billion for military that's been worn out. They need the money. 20 billion for the mighty, mighty Coast Guard. We're one step closer to fulfilling a promise Republicans made to make you safer. I hope we can get one big, beautiful bill in the House, but we need to act on border security and national security now. we're running out of time." Source: Source: Senator Lindsey Graham (Republican, South Carolina)

Further Reading
−  Less Information
Next Bill >

IssueVoter is a non-partisan civic engagement platform.

Sign up to make your voice count before laws pass and keep your lawmaker accountable.

  • Get alerts about bills before they pass.
  • See summaries, pros/cons, and recent news for each bill.
  • Send your opinion in 1-click.
  • Track your rep’s activity year-round.
  • Make a more informed decision at election time.
Register