ICE slammed for overspending amid ‘egregious' funding mismanagement in House report
A 168-page House report has slammed the Department of Homeland Security for 'egregious' funding mismanagement.
The House Appropriations Committee released its report on Wednesday for the Homeland Security funding bill, conveying complaints regarding departmental policies. The report also included guidance on how it would like the funding for the 2026 fiscal year to be spent.
One of the concerns included Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) spending more money than it had received. Lawmakers from both the Democrats and the Republicans have made such complaints amid the Trump administration's ratcheting up of deportations. This comes as the White House waits for Congress to pass a spending package, which may include billions of dollars in funding for immigration enforcement.
'Actions already taken in fiscal year 2025 are especially egregious —ICE began spending more than its appropriated level shortly after the fiscal year commenced and operations now far exceed available resources,' the report states. Fiscal year 2025 began in October.
'While the Committee recognizes the dynamic environment in which ICE must function, neither ICE nor the Department should rely on other components to fund the deficits that ICE itself often creates,' it adds. 'Not only does that presuppose that other missions within DHS are less important, but it also sets the precedent that the Department can shift funding away from congressional priorities within other components to compensate for ICE's budgetary mismanagement.'
The report states that such mismanagement is 'unacceptable' and calls on ICE to update the committee on a monthly basis, 'to ensure appropriate congressional oversight.'
The Homeland Security appropriations subcommittee chair, Republican Rep. Mark Amodei of Nevada, told ICE Director Todd Lyon during a recent hearing that the agency was at risk of violating the Antideficiency Act, which prohibits federal agencies from incurring expenses before Congress has approved the spending.
'I would appreciate it if you, for your part, would let folks know up your chain of command that this information, if it's not coming in real time, is not useful,' Amodei told Lyons, according to Politico.
He added that they 'have to keep in mind things like the Antideficiency Act … and I'll just be honest with you, speaking for me, I don't know that I have the information that I need to make sure that we're doing our job in the context of that.'
The report also states that there are concerns about the TSA, FEMA policy, cybersecurity, as well as the Coast Guard, in addition to the other agencies operated by DHS.
The full committee will mark up the bill on Thursday; however, Republican leadership in the House hasn't announced any floor action as of yet on any of the bills handling fiscal year 2026.
Bipartisan funding negotiations haven't started with less than four months until the start of the next fiscal year. Additionally, the White House has yet to send a full budget request.
Two-thirds of federal law enforcement spending is taken up by immigration and border issues for the 2025 fiscal year, the Cato Institute noted. That includes roughly $19 billion for CBP, $10 billion for ICE, $3.2 billion for DHS general offices, and $281 million for USCIS.
ICE spending has increased significantly since its creation in 2003. Recently, its budget has gone from $8.4 billion in 2023 to $9.6 billion in 2024, according to the Senate Appropriations Committee. The Homeland Security Appropriations Bill for 2026 currently includes proposed funding for ICE of $11 billion, about $960 million more than this year.
While congressional Republicans have shared concerns about the Trump administration spending too much on deportations, the White House is so far pushing ahead anyway, according to Politico. The administration is pushing legislators to pass the 'big, beautiful bill,' which would add billions of dollars for border security.
The Big Beautiful Bill Act would direct $168 billion to immigration and border security, according to the Congressional Budget Office, compared to $34 billion in fiscal year 2025.
This comes as Trump aide Stephen Miller is pushing for at least 3,000 arrests of illegal immigrants a day. Lyons noted earlier this month that ICE is currently averaging about 1,600.
An administration official told Politico earlier this month: 'It's not just the Democrats saying they'll throw a wrench in this. It's the Republicans, too, questioning why we're spending beyond our means.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump's policies could have a major impact on your credit score. Here's how
Your support helps us to tell the story Read more Support Now From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference. Read more President Donald Trump returned to the White House this January with a flurry of sweeping orders – some of which may impact Americans' credit scores. Trump and his allies are set on enacting his 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' which would add trillions to the country's already sizable deficit and drive up interest rates, producing large-scale macroeconomic repercussions. Financial markets have already warned of the rising debt, with Moody's cutting its pristine 'Aaa' U.S. credit rating, which could take even further hits if the deficit continues to rise. To help pay for the bill, Republicans are looking to make cuts to Medicaid and food assistance programs, without which, more Americans are likely to go into medical debt. Some 15 million Americans with medical debt may suffer even greater consequences of Trump's policies after his administration paused a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rule that would ban the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. As of now, medical debt can be included in credit scores and a significant amount of medical bills can drag down a credit score. A lower credit score means a person appears to be a bigger risk to a lender, such as a bank. That could lead to higher interest rates on loans, such as for a car or a home. open image in gallery President Donald Trump's spending bill will have far-reaching macroeconomic repercussions and likely impact Americans' credit scores. ( AP ) A Biden-era rule would have removed $49 million in medical debt from credit score records, but new leadership at CFPB appointed by Trump is attempting to reverse its course, NPR reported. In addition to the complete switch in its stance, the CFPB joined forces with plaintiffs who filed a lawsuit trying to stop the Biden ban. The rule has since been stuck in limbo, with Judge Sean Jordan from Texas' Eastern District federal court twice ordering a stay, delaying the rule's new start date until the end of July. The outcome of the lawsuit will have tremendous financial implications for millions of Americans whose medical debt has negatively impacted their credit scores. Meanwhile, consumer advocates have been speaking out on behalf of the medical debt rule, worried abandoning it would take away necessary consumer protections. "I'm disappointed for the 15 million Americans who have medical bills on their credit reports and have to suffer the consequences of poor credit scores because of it," Patricia Kelmar, senior director of health care campaigns at the U.S. PIRG Education Fund, told USA Today. open image in gallery Trump-appointed CFPB leaders is looking to reverse a Biden-era rule that would ban the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. ( Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. ) In the lawsuit filed in April, CFPB along with plaintiffs, the Consumer Data Industry Association and the Cornerstone Credit Union League, asked the judge to abandon the medical debt rule 'because it exceeds the bureau's statutory authority.' "We believe that Congress is the only one who can act on this and determine whether or not it can be on the credit report," Dan Smith, CEO and president of the Consumer Data Industry Association, told NPR. "Our intention here is to protect the credit reporting system. To ensure that it is as complete and accurate as possible," he said. In the lawsuit, the groups also note that the three largest credit bureaus - Experian, TransUnion and Equifax – no longer list paid medical debts, unpaid medical debts less than a year old and medical debts less than $500. Americans' credit scores may also see some changes thanks to a proposal from Trump that would cap credit card interest rates at 10 percent – a significant reduction from the current average interest rate of about 21 percent. Lower rates mean people would be able to pay back credit card bills quicker, and improve their credit scores by having less debt. The proposal was touted as a solution to the debt many Americans owe due to high credit card interest rates, Newsweek reported. open image in gallery Americans held $45 billion more in credit card debt in 2024 than in 2023. ( Getty Images/iStockphoto ) Americans held $1.21 trillion in credit card debt as of December 2024 – an increase of $45 billion from September 2024, per New York Fed data. Data also shows that 7.18 percent of U.S. credit card debt is in serious delinquency, likely causing many credit scores to take a serious downward spiral. Following Trump's campaign promise, Reps Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-Ny) and Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla) introduced legislation to cap credit card interest rates at a maximum of 10 percent. The measure would take the financial burden away from consumers, especially those with high-interest debt. The cap would last until January 1, 2031, according to the bill.
Reuters
17 minutes ago
- Reuters
Effort to strip Fed of interest paying power seen likely to bring upheaval to markets
NEW YORK, June 12 (Reuters) - A Republican senator's plan to take away the Federal Reserve's power to pay banks interest on cash they park on central bank books could cause chaos for monetary policy implementation if it were implemented, market participants said. In recent days, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas has been speaking about this power and his desire to see it ended as part of what he views as an effort to save money by the federal government. Stripping the Fed of the longstanding power would save the government $1 trillion, Cruz said in a CNBC interview last week. The senator said then that he did not know if it was likely his effort would work but that it was certainly possible. On Wednesday, Bloomberg, opens new tab reported that Cruz had also lobbied President Donald Trump, who has long been at odds with the Fed, as well as Republican colleagues, about his idea. 'We're agonizing trying to find a $50 billion cut here and there. This is over a trillion dollars, big dollars in savings,' Cruz told Bloomberg, saying of the payments, 'half of it is going to foreign banks, which makes no sense.' Cruz's office did not respond to a request for comment. The Fed declined to comment. Cruz's effort is being treated cautiously by Senator Tim Scott, the Republican from South Carolina who chairs the Senate Finance Committee. "While the desire to return to pre-crisis monetary policy operating procedures is understandable," the matter must be considered under normal Senate procedures, Scott said in a statement. Any move on this must start with a hearing, Scott said, adding, "this is not a decision to be rushed – it must be carefully considered and openly debated." The Fed's power to pay banks interest, granted by Congress, took effect in 2008 as the financial crisis dawned. It quickly gained prominence as part of a large-scale overhaul of the monetary policy architecture, as the Fed confronted the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression. As it now stands, the Fed pays deposit-taking banks 4.4% for reserves. It uses another tool called the reverse repo facility to take in cash from money market funds and others, paying them 4.25%. Together, the two rates are designed to keep the federal funds rate, the central bank's main tool for influencing the economy, within the desired range. Paying financial firms for de facto loans of cash is essential for interest rate control due to the very large amount of liquidity created by bond buying stimulus efforts. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Fed more than doubled the size of its balance sheet to a peak of $9 trillion, with asset purchases providing support to the economy beyond what the then near-zero short-term rates could deliver. If the Fed did not have the power to pay interest on deposits, the still substantial amount of liquidity sloshing around in markets would prevent it from controlling short-term rates. That said, concerns have long existed, even among some former central bankers, that paying banks money to deposit cash at the Fed is effectively a subsidy to banks. The other issue with paying interest on reserves is that it has led the Fed into an unprecedented period of loss-making. The Fed has been operating in the red because the interest rate it now has in place outstrips the income it earns off bonds it owns. Most analysts expect the loss-making to occur for some time to come. Fed losses mean that it is not handing over profits back to the Treasury, as it is required to do when it is in the green. Sums handed back to the Treasury over recent years contributed modestly to lowering deficits. Experts believe Cruz's plan would completely fail to achieve its goals and would instead cause huge upheaval in money markets. Barclays Capital economists said on Tuesday that ending the power would simply push the cash into the reverse repo facility, which means the central bank would still be paying lots of interest to financial firms, thus negating any deficit savings. J.P. Morgan strategists said in a note last week that under Cruz's plan, 'the Fed's ability to control money market rates may be compromised, complicating its efforts to guide broader financial conditions via the fed funds rate and other money market rates.'
The Independent
18 minutes ago
- The Independent
‘Political pawns': Morale among California National Guard and Marines deployed in LA is underwater, report claims
The 4,000 California National Guard troops and 700 US Marines sent to Los Angeles in response to the ongoing anti-immigration raid protests are reportedly suffering from low morale, according to members of the veterans community, amid allegations of a chaotic initial deployment and widespread concerns of the military being drafted into domestic law enforcement. 'Among all that I spoke with, the feeling was that the Marines are being used as political pawns, and it strains the perception that Marines are apolitical,' Marine Corps veteran Janessa Goldbeck, who runs the Vet Voice Foundation, told The Guardian. 'Some were concerned that the Marines were being set up for failure. The overall perception was that the situation was nowhere at the level where Marines were necessary.' 'The sentiment across the board right now is that deploying military force against our own communities isn't the kind of national security we signed up for,' added Sarah Streyder of the Secure Families Initiative in an interview with the outlet. Controversy has followed the deployment since President Trump first federalized the California National Guard and ordered the state troops into Los Angeles on Saturday and a battalion of Marines was activated two days later. California has sued the Trump administration over deploying the Guard, alleging the decision has 'caused real and irreparable damage' to both Los Angeles and the state's larger sovereignty. Governor Gavin Newsom has also accused the White House of sending in thousands of troops without adequate provisions or training, sharing photos obtained by The San Francisco Chronicle of guardsmen sleeping head-to-foot on bare floors. 'You sent your troops here without fuel, food, water or a place to sleep,' he wrote on X. 'Here they are — being forced to sleep on the floor, piled on top of one another.' 'This is what happens when the president and (Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth) demand the National Guard state assets deploy immediately with no plan in place … (and) no federal funding available for food, water, fuel and lodging,' a source involved in the deployment told the Chronicle of conditions during the early stages. 'This is really the failure of the federal government. If you're going to federalize these troops, then take care of them.' U.S. Northern Command later said the photo showed soldiers who weren't current on a mission in what were only temporary accommodations due a 'fluid security situation.' When asked for comment, a spokesperson for U.S. Northern Command pointed to a website for Task Force 51, which is coordinating the protection mission in Los Angeles. 'The Soldiers and Marines have contracting for billeting, latrines, showers, handwashing stations, food service, full laundry service, bulk ice, and bulk fuel,' the website reads, in regards to troop conditions. 'While awaiting fulfillment of the contract, Soldiers and Marines have adequate shelter, food, and water.' Federal officials say the military members in Los Angeles will not be formally arresting protesters, though they might temporarily detain individuals to stop threats or interference against federal agents, and they have authorization to provide security to federal buildings and operations. U.S. Northern Command shared a photo Thursday showing Marines training in non-lethal tactics with riot shields, and the military has said the troops could deploy within the next 48 hours. President Trump has faced larger criticisms for allegedly politicizing the military in response to the protests, including upset over a campaign-rally style speech about the crisis in front of jeering troops at Fort Bragg in North Carolina. Base officials reportedly screened the crowd for those who disagreed with Trump and asked them to alert their superiors so others could be put in their place during the speech.
