Congressmen divided on use of military money for border wall
Republican congressmen who represent the Oklahoma City area have different opinions on whether President Donald Trump can, and should, use military funds to construct a large wall along the nation’s border with Mexico.
Congress set aside $1.6 billion for border security in a massive spending bill that was signed into law last week, far less than what will be needed if the president is to uphold his campaign promise of building a wall along the entire southern border.
Trump, reportedly frustrated by the relatively small $1.6 billion figure, has urged Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and House Speaker Paul Ryan to spend defense funds on the endeavor, citing a national security risk, The Washington Post reported Wednesday.
Rep. Tom Cole, R-Moore, attended a town hall meeting in south Oklahoma City on Thursday. The first question, from a military veteran, was about Trump’s idea.
“Not going to happen,” Cole said. “Really, it can’t happen. Congress decides what the budget is and where the money’s going to be spent. That military buildup is very, very necessary.
“I don’t think that’s likely to occur and it’s certainly not something I would support.”
Cole was asked about the proposal again later in the meeting. He reiterated his belief that military funds will not, and should not, be used for construction of a border wall at a time when Congress is strengthening the nation’s military forces.
“Russia’s much more aggressive than it was, China’s a lot more assertive than it was. We need to restore this (funding),” he said. “So, I don’t think Congress is going to agree to take money away from the military.”
When asked a third time about the president’s idea, Cole said, “I don’t know if it’s an either-or trade-off. In a $4 trillion budget — and that’s what the budget is, $4 trillion — we can find $25 billion to make sure you’ve got a secure border.”
Because the Constitution grants Congress, not the president, power over the nation’s purse, any attempt at shifting funds to the southern border would seemingly have to go through lawmakers. Rep. Steve Russell, an Oklahoma City Republican, was asked Wednesday on Fox Business whether Trump’s idea is constitutional.
“Is it OK to defend the republic and secure our borders? Of course, it’s OK to do that,” Russell said. “In fact, if you go back to the (President Ronald) Reagan era and you look at the Joint Task Force Bravo when I served, you had a lot of military assets that were used in conjunction with our border protection service. We have the absolute requirement to defend this republic and that means our borders, as well.”
The task force, authorized in 1983, is based in Honduras and was primarily used to counter Soviet influence and break up drug trafficking operations. In more recent years, its duties have included stopping regional threats before they reach Mexico’s border with the United States.
Russell is a member of the House Armed Services Committee and a retired Army commander. When asked if it is a good idea to spend military funds on construction of a border wall, Russell said, “I think it’s been a good idea to secure the border for decades.
“I think one of the things we have to realize is we have a responsibility to secure the border. The president has made that quite clear. Militarily, it makes good sense to keep drugs, to keep criminal activity out,” he added.
Cole, who faced several questions about immigration and border security at two town hall meetings this week, indicated Congress will take a piecemeal approach to the problem, funding border efforts over the course of years. Russell said Trump is right to favor a faster approach.
“I think the greater message to Congress is, when are we going to do something about it, to secure the border? The majority of the American public believes we should have a secure border, and the president is trying to find another option to do that,” he said.