House Passes DHS Appropriations Bill (H.R. 8029) 218-206 and Adopts Support Resolution Amidst Shutdown Debate
The House convened for a session marked by significant legislative action and extensive debate surrounding the ongoing Department of Homeland Security (DHS) shutdown. Members first adopted H. Res. 1128, expressing support for DHS and its employees. Subsequently, the House considered and passed H.R. 8029, the "Pay Our Homeland Defenders Act," a bill to comprehensively appropriate funds for DHS for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, following a rejected motion to recommit. The day also featured multiple special order debates on contentious issues including immigration enforcement against children, the influence of Sharia law in America, the nation's fiscal challenges, and U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
The passage of H.R. 8029 represents a renewed effort by the House to fully fund DHS amidst a partial government shutdown, directly impacting the pay of thousands of federal workers and the operational capabilities of critical security agencies. The debates surrounding this funding, as well as the special orders, highlighted deep partisan divisions on immigration policy, national security priorities, and the role of government, setting the stage for continued legislative battles and public discourse on these high-stakes issues.
Pay Our Homeland Defenders Act
H.R. 8029Question before the chamber
Passage of H.R. 8029.
The case for
Mr. Cole and other Republicans argued that the bill comprehensively funds DHS, resources critical security efforts, pays personnel, and restores operational strength. They stated that the House has passed this funding twice before with bipartisan support, and that the ongoing shutdown is due to Senate Democrats' "radical and unachievable policy demands" and desire to stop immigration enforcement. They highlighted the negative impacts on TSA agents (missed paychecks, resignations, long lines) and other DHS components like CISA and FEMA, emphasizing that the bill is about respect, responsibility, and safety, and that Democrats are choosing politics over national security. Mr. Scalise quoted Hakeem Jeffries from 2015 calling it "legislative malpractice" to shut down DHS.
The case against
Ms. DeLauro and other Democrats argued that the bill is "twice-doomed legislation" and "more political theater," stating that the President has given up on funding DHS and is refusing to make a deal. They contended that the shutdown is a "Trump Republican shutdown" and that Republicans are prioritizing "ICE brutality" over the American people. They highlighted that ICE and CBP are largely funded, while TSA workers are not, and that the Department made the decision not to pay TSA. Ms. DeLauro proposed a compromise bill (H.R. 7481) to fund non-ICE/CBP components, arguing that Republicans refuse to allow a vote on it. They called for reforms to ICE and CBP, including judicial warrants, independent investigations, officer ID requirements, and body cameras, and criticized the administration for using children as "pawns" and inflicting trauma.
Disposition
Passed · recorded vote
The bill making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, was passed.
for_votes: 218, against_votes: 206, abstentions: null
Amendments
- Motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on Appropriations with instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith, with an amendment to replace its text with H.R. 7481, which would fund non-ICE/CBP components of DHS. (Ms. DeLauro of Connecticut) — rejected [for_votes: 210, against_votes: 215, abstentions: null]
Who is affected
- Federal employees of DHS (TSA, FEMA, Coast Guard, CISA, Secret Service, ICE, CBP): Directly impacted by the ongoing shutdown, missing paychecks, and facing financial hardship. The passage of H.R. 8029 aims to restore their pay and operational stability.
- American taxpayers: Bear the cost of government operations, including the appropriations for DHS.
- Travelers and the public: Experiencing disruptions and long lines at airports due to TSA staffing shortages during the shutdown.
- Immigrant children and families: Directly affected by immigration enforcement policies, including detention, family separation, and the conditions in detention facilities, leading to trauma and health issues, which were central to the debate on the motion to recommit.
- U.S. citizens concerned about civil liberties: Concerns raised about the conduct of ICE and CBP agents, including warrantless entries, use of force, and lack of accountability, which were central to the debate on the motion to recommit.
Expressing the Support of the House of Representatives for the Department of Homeland Security
H. Res. 1128Question before the chamber
Adoption of H. Res. 1128.
The case for
Mr. Mackenzie argued that the resolution affirms the importance of DHS, the necessity of funding its agencies and employees, the risks of defunding the security apparatus, and expresses gratitude to the men and women protecting the nation. He emphasized that saying "yes" to funding does not mean saying "no" to reform, and that defunding the security apparatus and creating chaos at airports does not achieve reform goals.
The case against
Mr. Thompson of Mississippi characterized the resolution as symbolic and "political theater" that does nothing to reopen DHS or pay its workforce, calling it a result of Republican failure to govern. He argued that DHS employees need paychecks, not words, and that the Trump administration has politicized DHS and neglected critical missions outside of ICE and CBP. He also noted that the resolution does not address the administration's withholding of homeland security grants or counterterrorism funding.
Disposition
Adopted · recorded vote
The resolution expressing support for the Department of Homeland Security was adopted.
for_votes: 225, against_votes: 187, abstentions: 13
Who is affected
- Department of Homeland Security: The resolution expresses support for its mission and the importance of its funding.
- DHS employees: The resolution expresses gratitude for their commitment to protecting the United States.
End Cruel Immigration Enforcement Against Kids
Question before the chamber
Special Order debate on the impact of immigration enforcement on children.
The case for
Ms. Dexter, Mr. Tonko, Ms. Balint, Mr. Garcia of Illinois, Mrs. Ramirez, Ms. Moore of Wisconsin, Mr. Vargas, and Ms. Jayapal spoke against the Trump administration's immigration policies, highlighting the detention of children, family separations, and the trauma inflicted. They cited examples of children detained (Liam Ramos, Diana Crespo-Gonzalez, Steven, Susej, Deiver) and the inhumane conditions in facilities like Dilley. They criticized ORR's increased coordination with ICE, the use of children as "lures," and the lack of basic care. They called for an end to cruel enforcement, the closure of Dilley, and the defunding/dismantling of ICE.
The case against
No opposition was aired in the Record.
Disposition
Debate concluded. · other
The special order debate on immigration enforcement against children concluded without a vote or specific legislative action.
Who is affected
- Children and families (immigrant and U.S. citizens): Affected by immigration enforcement policies, including detention, family separation, and the conditions in detention facilities, leading to trauma and health issues.
- Educators and daycare workers: Impacted by ICE activities near schools and facilities, creating fear and disruption for students.
Sharia-Free America
Question before the chamber
Special Order debate on the perceived threat of Sharia law in the United States.
The case for
Mr. Self, Mr. Weber, Mr. Harris of North Carolina, Mrs. Miller of Illinois, Mr. Fulcher, Mr. Carter of Georgia, Mr. Moore of Alabama, Mrs. Biggs of South Carolina, Mr. Fine, Mr. Crane, and Mr. Roy argued that Sharia law is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution and Western civilization, posing a danger to individual freedom, equal rights, and the rule of law. They cited examples of Sharia-adherent enclaves (East Plano Islamic Center, EPIC City/The Meadow), alleged intimidation tactics, and recent Islamist-inspired attacks in the U.S. They expressed concern about the erosion of Western culture due to unchecked immigration in Europe and called for a ban on Sharia's influence in legal systems, stronger vetting, and designating certain organizations as terrorist groups.
The case against
No opposition was aired in the Record.
Disposition
Debate concluded. · other
The special order debate on Sharia law concluded without a vote or specific legislative action.
Who is affected
- American citizens: Concerned about the influence of foreign legal systems, the preservation of constitutional principles, and potential threats to individual liberties.
- Religious minorities and women: Speakers argued that Sharia law, where enforced, leads to restrictions on basic freedoms, disadvantages women, and limits the rights of religious minorities.
Draining the Swamp (Fiscal Responsibility)
Question before the chamber
Special Order debate on the nation's fiscal challenges and government spending.
The case for
Mr. Schweikert discussed the U.S. financial situation, citing the Treasury's balance sheet showing $47.8 trillion in current liabilities against $6 trillion in assets. He highlighted $88.4 trillion in unfunded Social Security and Medicare liabilities over 75 years, projecting that a child born today would need to contribute 104 percent of their lifetime earnings to cover federal government pensions. He criticized the lack of political will to address mandatory spending, the rising interest payments on national debt (now the second-largest expenditure), and the potential for the Social Security and Medicare trust funds to be empty in less than 6.5 years. He advocated for technology adoption, deregulation, and a talent-based immigration system to stabilize the debt.
The case against
No opposition was aired in the Record.
Disposition
Debate concluded. · other
The special order debate on fiscal responsibility concluded without a vote or specific legislative action.
Who is affected
- Future generations: Projected to be poorer than their parents and bear the burden of accumulating national debt and unfunded liabilities for Social Security and Medicare.
- Seniors: Face potential shortfalls in Social Security and Medicare benefits if trust funds are depleted.
- Taxpayers: Impacted by rising interest payments on the national debt and potential future tax increases to cover government spending.
Undeclared War in Iran
Question before the chamber
Special Order debate on U.S. military actions in Iran and the Middle East.
The case for
Ms. Kaptur criticized President Trump's "undeclared war" against Iran, stating it has cost U.S. taxpayers nearly $40 billion without congressional authorization, violating Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. She highlighted the economic impact (Dow Jones drop, rising oil/gas prices) and the human cost (13 U.S. troops dead, over 300 injured). She questioned the President's request for an additional $200 billion, arguing that Middle East oil barons should bear the cost, not American taxpayers. She also noted the President's shifting justifications for the war and the lack of troop commitments from Gulf kingdoms, warning against perpetual wars and the alienation of allies.
The case against
No opposition was aired in the Record.
Disposition
Debate concluded. · other
The special order debate on the undeclared war in Iran concluded without a vote or specific legislative action.
Who is affected
- U.S. military personnel and their families: Directly impacted by deployments, casualties, and injuries in the Middle East.
- American taxpayers: Bear the financial burden of the war, including billions in unauthorized spending.
- U.S. economy: Affected by market instability, rising oil and gas prices, and potential trade disruptions due to the conflict.
- American citizens (healthcare recipients): Concerns raised that war costs are leading to cuts in domestic programs like healthcare.
Sharareh Moghaddam's Detention, No Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East, and AI Threat
Question before the chamber
Special Order debate on a constituent's detention, nuclear proliferation, and artificial intelligence.
The case for
Mr. Sherman raised three distinct issues. First, he highlighted the "heartbreaking, desperate, and unfair situation" of his constituent, Ms. Sharareh Moghaddam, a respected small business owner and primary caregiver for her U.S. citizen husband, who has been detained by immigration officials for over 7 months despite a federal court ruling in her favor and her declining health. Second, he addressed the threat of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, specifically Saudi Arabia's desire for nuclear weapons, arguing against any nuclear cooperation agreement without the highest safeguards (like those agreed to by the UAE) to prevent clandestine weapons programs, and announced a bill to require affirmative congressional vote for such agreements. Third, he discussed the long-term existential threat of artificial intelligence, warning of a "headlong race" to make AI more powerful without spending "nothing to make sure that this artificial intelligence is not self-aware, self-motivated, has a survival instinct, has ambitions of its own, and has a desire to affect the world for its own reasons." He advocated for an "AI Research and Threat Assessment Act" to monitor and prevent such developments.
The case against
No opposition was aired in the Record.
Disposition
Debate concluded. · other
The special order debate on these multiple topics concluded without a vote or specific legislative action.
Who is affected
- Ms. Sharareh Moghaddam and her family: Detained by immigration officials despite a favorable court ruling, facing declining health and separation from her U.S. citizen husband who requires her care.
- U.S. citizens and the international community: Affected by the risks of nuclear proliferation if Saudi Arabia develops nuclear weapons without adequate safeguards, potentially destabilizing the Middle East and global security.
- Humanity: Faces long-term existential threats from the unmonitored development of artificial intelligence, particularly if it develops self-awareness, ambition, or a survival instinct independent of human objectives.
House Adopts Resolution Supporting DHS
mediumThe House adopted H. Res. 1128, expressing support for the Department of Homeland Security and its employees, and recognizing the importance of full funding. The vote was 225 yeas to 187 nays, with 13 answered "present."
House Passes DHS Appropriations Bill
highH.R. 8029, the "Pay Our Homeland Defenders Act," which comprehensively funds DHS for FY2026, passed the House by a recorded vote of 218 yeas to 206 nays. This marks the third time the House has passed such a bill during the ongoing partial shutdown.
Motion to Recommit H.R. 8029 Rejected
highA motion to recommit H.R. 8029, which sought to replace its text with a Democratic proposal (H.R. 7481) to fund only non-ICE/CBP components of DHS, was rejected by a recorded vote of 210 yeas to 215 nays.
Extended Debate on DHS Shutdown Responsibility
highExtensive debate occurred regarding the ongoing DHS shutdown, with Republicans attributing it to Senate Democrats' refusal to pass full funding and Democrats blaming the Trump administration and House Republicans for not accepting a compromise that excludes ICE/CBP funding without reforms.
Multiple Special Order Debates on High-Stakes Issues
mediumThe chamber-day included several special order debates on topics such as the impact of immigration enforcement on children, the perceived threat of Sharia law in America, the nation's fiscal health, and U.S. foreign policy and AI, reflecting broad and contentious policy discussions.