Democrats, White House strike spending deal that would avert government...

Trump has rushed this week to change the face of his immigration operations in Minneapolis and Republicans in Congress who rarely criticize him or his administration have vented their concern about the tactics being used and the goals of the operation, conceding that major changes are needed. Congressional leaders were polling their members Thursday evening to see if any senator would object to the speedy passage of the spending deal. An objection from any one senator could derail the measure. It was also unclear how quickly the House could move on the legislation, which would need that chamber’s approval before it could become law. If it fails to pass, government funding would lapse Saturday morning. The agreement came after Democrats earlier Thursday followed through on their pledge to oppose the spending package, which includes $64.4 billion for the Department of Homeland Security as well as an array of government agencies, including the Pentagon and health programs. Every Democrat opposed moving forward, as did several Republicans, citing various spending objections. After Pretti’s death, Democrats had said they would not vote for any further funding for the Department of Homeland Security unless strict limits were added to curtail immigration officers’ actions. They demanded that the homeland security portion be separated from the rest of the spending package and held up while they try to strike a deal with Trump and Republicans for new restrictions on the president’s immigration crackdown. “This is a moment of truth,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, said Thursday. “Congress must act to rein in ICE and end the violence.” Schumer and the president began negotiations late Wednesday to resolve the dispute and head off a government shutdown, according to two officials familiar with the talks who described them on condition of anonymity. In a social media post, Trump endorsed the deal, saying “another long and damaging Government Shutdown” would be bad for the country. “Hopefully, both Republicans and Democrats will give a very much needed Bipartisan ‘YES’ Vote” to the agreement, he wrote. Republican lawmakers had also said they were hopeful about avoiding a prolonged shutdown — following the record-breaking 43-day lapse in federal funding last fall — and criticized Democrats’ opposition to the funding package. “This nation deserves safety and security,” said Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming, the No. 2 Senate Republican. “Not another government shutdown.” The administration’s talks with Democrats began after the lawmakers unveiled a set of demands they said they would insist on in exchange for voting for homeland security funding. They included banning immigration officers from wearing masks and requiring them to wear body cameras and visible identification, an end to random immigration sweeps, requirements for judicial warrants for stop and searches, and requirements for immigration officers to follow the same use-of-force standards as community law enforcement. They also want an independent investigation of the two fatal shootings in Minneapolis. “No more secret police,” Schumer said. “The Republican majority must step up to the plate. Republicans in Congress cannot allow this violent status quo to continue. They must work with Democrats on legislation — real legislation.” If the spending agreement holds, it would clear the way for what promises to be a hard-fought negotiation over what restrictions could be imposed on immigration operations. Some Republicans were already raising objections to the Democratic demands, including the ban on masks. “I’m worried about these guys who are being put into a dangerous situation in crowds, where you know damn well some of the people there are just there to play gotcha,” Senator Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican, said. “I just think that is a police safety issue, and I’m black-and-white on police safety issues.” Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, said he supported some of the Democratic proposals, but also wanted any compromise to force states and municipalities to scrap their policies against cooperating with federal immigration authorities. “I think the best legislative solution for our country would be to adopt some of these reforms to ICE and Border Patrol, but to also end forever the sanctuary city policies being pushed by 12 states,” Graham wrote on the social media platform X. Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, said he believed the restrictions being pursued by his party would be seen by the public as “reasonable, popular, and necessary to reform these gross abuses.” “I think people see that it is like, ‘Yeah, why wouldn’t we do that?’” Kaine said. This article originally appeared in The New York Times.