Conservative Budget Proposal Draws Fire From White House Over Border Security

Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), joined by members of the House Freedom Caucus, speaks at a news conference on the infrastructure bill outside the Capitol Building in Washington, on Aug. 23, 2021. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

The White House claims that a budget plan proposed this month by the conservative House Freedom Caucus (HFC) would make the southern border less secure by removing funds for Customs and Border Protection (CBP) employees and limiting the capacity to fight drug trafficking.

The White House described the HFC’s proposal for changes to the Biden administration’s budget as a “five-alarm fire for hardworking families” that threatens public safety and border security.

According to a March 10 letter from the group, members of the HFC said they would “consider voting to raise the debt ceiling” if certain contingencies were enacted through legislation.

HFC proposed policies that would limit future spending and reduce current spending. Additionally, it would recoup cash from COVID-19 funding that was not used, recoup the IRS growth fund, and several other cuts. According to the HFC, the proposal would save $3 trillion over the long term.

The White House responded to the stipulations on March 20, citing a review (pdf) by agencies and the Office of Management and Budget which asserted that the proposal “will make our border less secure”  and eliminate funding for thousands of CBP employees.

“The extreme MAGA Republican House Freedom Caucus proposal will be a five-alarm fire for families—including by endangering public safety,” the White House said in a statement about the HFC’s stipulations, saying the group is “pushing draconian cuts to these critical national priorities that would endanger Americans’ safety.”

The White House’s statement went on to assert that “The extreme MAGA Republican House Freedom Caucus proposal would eliminate funding for more than 2,000 Customs and Border Protection agents and officers and severely undermine our ability to secure the border and combat drug trafficking—allowing an additional 150,000 pounds of cocaine, nearly 900 pounds of fentanyl, nearly 2,000 pounds of heroin, and more than 17,000 pounds of methamphetamine into our country.”

HFC Chairman Scott Perry (R-Pa.) called the White House’s response to their plan “Just more pearl-clutching from a president whose statements drift daily toward 1984 instead of credible policy in 2023.”

“Fear and smear isn’t a pillar of policy—it’s propaganda,” Perry said in a statement to The Epoch Times. “This latest tactic is a disgusting attempt to distract, deceive, and deny his record-setting incompetence in surrendering operational control of our border to drug cartels, sinking our economy, and ushering in debt and bank crises that are crushing Americans.”

Fellow HFC member Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) told The Epoch Times that the White House’s report was a “totally baseless claim.”

“If anything, the Biden Administration has severely undermined our ability to secure the border and combat drug trafficking. Ask any agent down at the border,” Biggs said.

The HFC clarified that the White House’s assertion centered around HFC’s intention to return non-defense discretionary spending to levels prior to COVID FY2019. But, the administration’s response has omitted that HFC is referencing “topline” non-defense discretionary spending.

This is significant since, according to the caucus, more than enough unnecessary spending can be reduced in non-defense discretionary categories without affecting border security.

An HFC spokesperson also objected to the White House’s characterization of the changes, telling The Epoch Times “It’s preposterous that the Biden Administration is trying to claim that the House Freedom Caucus is trying to diminish border security. This White House has done more to throw our southwestern border into chaos than anyone else in history.”