A small group of Dems looks to break from their party on ICE funding

A small but determined group of House Democrats is preparing to break from their party's leadership on a key funding issue, signaling potential internal fractures within the Democratic caucus ahead of critical budget negotiations. The group, led by Rep. Jared Golden of Maine, is organizing to support funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the upcoming appropriations package, a position that directly contradicts the stance of many progressive Democrats who have called for defunding or significantly reducing ICE's budget.

The move comes as Congress approaches the September 30 deadline to pass government funding bills, with border security and immigration enforcement remaining among the most contentious issues in the appropriations process. While Democratic leadership has generally advocated for more limited ICE funding with increased oversight, this faction believes that fully funding the agency is necessary for effective border management and national security.

Rep. Golden, a moderate Democrat who represents a district with a significant rural population, has been vocal about his support for border security measures. In a recent statement, he argued that "securing our borders and enforcing our laws are fundamental responsibilities of the federal government, and we must provide ICE with the resources it needs to carry out its mission effectively." This position aligns him more closely with Republican lawmakers on this specific issue than with many of his Democratic colleagues.

The group's strategy involves leveraging their votes in the narrow House majority to force concessions from leadership. With Democrats holding a slim margin, even a small number of defectors could derail the party's negotiating position or force them to accept Republican amendments to secure passage. This dynamic gives the moderate faction significant leverage in the appropriations process.

Progressive Democrats have pushed back against this approach, arguing that ICE's enforcement priorities have led to human rights abuses and family separations. They point to specific incidents of misconduct and advocate for redirecting funds toward community-based alternatives to detention and immigration court improvements. The Congressional Progressive Caucus has consistently included ICE funding cuts in their budget proposals, creating a clear divide with the moderate faction.

The stakes are particularly high this year because the appropriations process is happening against the backdrop of ongoing border challenges and political pressure from both parties. Republicans have made border security a central campaign issue, while Democrats are balancing their base's demands for immigration reform with the practical realities of governing.

This internal Democratic conflict reflects a broader tension within the party about how to address immigration issues. The moderate faction, which includes representatives from competitive districts, believes that supporting ICE funding is politically necessary to maintain their seats and demonstrate a pragmatic approach to border security. They argue that the party's progressive wing's stance on defunding ICE is out of touch with mainstream voters in swing districts.

The outcome of this dispute could have significant implications for the appropriations process and the Democratic Party's unity heading into the 2026 midterm elections. If the moderate faction succeeds in securing ICE funding, it would represent a victory for the party's centrist wing and could shift the party's overall position on immigration enforcement. Conversely, if leadership holds firm and the moderates are forced to vote against the party line, it could create lasting divisions within the caucus.

The negotiations are expected to intensify as the September 30 deadline approaches, with both sides working to find a compromise that addresses border security concerns while maintaining party unity. The moderate faction's willingness to break ranks represents a significant development in the ongoing debate over immigration policy and the Democratic Party's direction on this critical issue.