Senate Passes Fiscal Year 2026 Budget Resolution

The Senate passed S.Con.Res.33 by a vote of 50-48 setting forth the congressional budget for fiscal year 2026, setting the stage for Congress to vote next month on a budget reconciliation package to fund immigration enforcement and reopen the Department of Homeland Security.

Objective Facts

The Senate passed S.Con.Res.33 by a vote of 50-48 setting forth the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2026 and budgetary levels for fiscal years 2027 through 2035. Republican Senators Murkowski and Paul voted against the measure; Senators Grassley and Warner did not vote. The Senate voted to take up a GOP-written budget resolution designed to provide enough funding for immigration enforcement agencies through the remainder of President Donald Trump's term, marking the first step in a reconciliation process that Republicans hope to use to bypass Democratic opposition to funding Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol without new guardrails on federal immigration agents. The draft fiscal 2026 budget resolution calls on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee to write reconciliation legislation by May 15 that would provide up to $70 billion, which is expected to sustain the immigration agencies for 3.5 years. The inability of lawmakers to reach consensus on funding legislation triggered a partial government shutdown that's now in its 66th day.

Left-Leaning Perspective

Senate Democrats, led by Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, argued that the budget resolution represented misplaced priorities. Schumer said 'Instead of pumping hundreds of billions of dollars into ICE and Border Patrol, Republicans should be working with Democrats to lower out-of-pocket costs'. Ahead of the vote-a-rama, Schumer wrote on X that 'While Republicans try to give up to $140 billion to ICE, we'll be forcing votes all night on lowering costs, ending the war, and making health care cheaper'. Schumer characterized the resolution as Republicans wanting to 'shell out billions of dollars to Donald Trump's private army without any common-sense restraints or reforms,' while 'Democrats want to put money in people's pockets by lowering their costs,' warning that 'Republicans are about to learn the hard way that when they refuse to reduce costs, they lose'. Democrats insisted that any funding for ICE and Border Patrol should include policy changes demanded by Democrats, such as mandating body cameras and limiting raids in sensitive locations like schools and hospitals. In a press conference, Schumer said Democrats had repeatedly asked for 'common sense' safeguards that would require immigration agents to show identification, and that 'when you ask the American people, they're on our side'. Democrats' framing emphasized the fatal shootings by federal agents in Minneapolis and what they characterized as the absence of accountability mechanisms. The left's coverage largely omitted Republican arguments about border security metrics and underspending, focusing instead on cost-of-living concerns and police reform principles that they said had broad public support.

Right-Leaning Perspective

Senate Republicans, led by Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham and Majority Leader John Thune, presented the resolution as a necessary response to Democratic obstruction. Graham stated that 'The vast majority of Republicans stuck together to do something Democrats are refusing to do: Fully fund the Border Patrol and ICE for three and a half years through the Trump presidency'. Graham argued that 'Now is not the time to defund Border Patrol, and now is certainly not the time to put ICE out of business. These men and women have been dealing with the consequences of the over 11 million illegal immigrants that came to the United States during the Biden Administration'. Thune said on the floor 'We have a multistep process ahead of us, but at the end, Republicans will have helped ensure that America's borders are secure and prevented Democrats from defunding these important agencies'. Senator Ron Johnson, a member of the budget committee, said that reconciliation was the only way to fund immigration operations 'because of Democrats' just obnoxious obstructionism'. Republicans highlighted border security achievements under Trump, with one Republican senator's office noting that crossings are at historic lows, with 'Daily apprehensions have dropped to 245, a 95% decrease from the 5,110 daily average during the Biden-era' and 'CBP recorded 237,538 encounters at the southern border in 2025, a dramatic fall from more than one and a half million in 2024'. Right-leaning coverage emphasized Republican unity on the vote (despite two GOP defections), the procedural necessity of reconciliation due to Democratic obstruction, and the urgency of funding agencies that had been operating without sustained appropriations. Republicans' framing largely omitted detailed engagement with Democratic safety concerns or the specific incidents that prompted the shutdown.

Deep Dive

The budget resolution vote represents the culmination of a funding stalemate that began after two fatal federal agent shootings in Minneapolis prompted Democrats to demand immigration enforcement reforms. Months of bipartisan negotiations to end the DHS shutdown have faltered as Republicans rebuffed demands from Democrats to put limits on immigration enforcement operations following the killings of two American citizens in Minneapolis by immigration enforcement agents. Senate Democrats and Republicans failed to reach an agreement on reforms, and opted instead last month to fund the bulk of DHS, while leaving out funds for ICE and parts of CBP, but Republicans in the House refused to consider it, saying they wouldn't support any bill that didn't include money for immigration enforcement. This impasse forced Republicans to deploy budget reconciliation—a tool designed for expedited passage of legislation affecting revenues or mandatory spending—to circumvent the 60-vote threshold and fund immigration agencies without Democratic input. Each side has legitimate procedural and policy claims. Democrats argue they are exercising appropriate oversight of law enforcement agencies following civilian deaths and seeking reasonable accountability measures that standard police departments employ. Republicans maintain that Democratic refusal to fund agencies they view as essential, combined with demands for policy changes that effectively defund operations, leaves reconciliation as the only path forward—a tool both parties have historically used when facing obstructionism. The resolution itself—a 50-48 vote with two GOP defections—suggests significant underlying disagreement even within the Republican coalition, with Sen. Murkowski opposing the resolution because it would set up funding outside the annual appropriations process and move agencies outside Congress' yearly funding and oversight role, while Sen. Paul voted no after arguing Senate Republicans should not approve another $70 billion for ICE and Border Patrol while the agencies still have more than $100 billion in unobligated funding, saying 'Congress ought to fund border security but we should be good stewards of the taxpayer dollars'. The immediate question is whether the House adopts the same budget framework, which Republican leadership wants to avoid further delays. There's already been a push from some House Republicans to expand the scope of the effort, something that could complicate leadership's plans, as any changes the House makes would then have to go back to the Senate, where the chamber would have to undertake another vote-a-rama. Whether House Republicans would be willing to abide by that plan remained an open question, as some House conservatives have bristled at the notion of having to fund the department in two pieces, and Speaker Mike Johnson has said the House would need to pass the reconciliation bill for immigration enforcement funding first, before taking up the Senate-passed bill for the rest of the department. Trump's June 1 deadline adds pressure but does not guarantee success.

OBJ SPEAKING

Create StoryTimelinesVoter ToolsRegional AnalysisAll StoriesCommunity PicksUSWorldPoliticsBusinessHealthEntertainmentTechnologyAbout

Senate Passes Fiscal Year 2026 Budget Resolution

The Senate passed S.Con.Res.33 by a vote of 50-48 setting forth the congressional budget for fiscal year 2026, setting the stage for Congress to vote next month on a budget reconciliation package to fund immigration enforcement and reopen the Department of Homeland Security.

Apr 23, 2026
What's Going On

The Senate passed S.Con.Res.33 by a vote of 50-48 setting forth the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2026 and budgetary levels for fiscal years 2027 through 2035. Republican Senators Murkowski and Paul voted against the measure; Senators Grassley and Warner did not vote. The Senate voted to take up a GOP-written budget resolution designed to provide enough funding for immigration enforcement agencies through the remainder of President Donald Trump's term, marking the first step in a reconciliation process that Republicans hope to use to bypass Democratic opposition to funding Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol without new guardrails on federal immigration agents. The draft fiscal 2026 budget resolution calls on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee to write reconciliation legislation by May 15 that would provide up to $70 billion, which is expected to sustain the immigration agencies for 3.5 years. The inability of lawmakers to reach consensus on funding legislation triggered a partial government shutdown that's now in its 66th day.

Left says: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer framed the vote as Republicans wanting to 'shell out billions of dollars to Donald Trump's private army without any common-sense restraints or reforms' while 'Democrats want to put money in people's pockets by lowering their costs'. He argued on the Senate floor that Republicans were fighting to 'maintain two unchecked rogue agencies' instead of reducing household costs.
Right says: Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham framed the vote as Republicans doing 'something Democrats are refusing to do: Fully fund the Border Patrol and ICE for three and a half years through the Trump presidency'. Senate Majority Leader John Thune argued that 'at the end, Republicans will have helped ensure that America's borders are secure and prevented Democrats from defunding these important agencies'.
✓ Common Ground
Both sides agree that the resolution is an initial procedural step in a complex reconciliation process that Republicans believe will allow them to fund immigration enforcement agencies through the remainder of President Trump's term.
Both Democrats and Republicans acknowledge that DHS funding became a flashpoint in Congress after two deadly shootings by federal agents in Minneapolis in January, though they differ sharply on the implications.
Several voices across both parties recognize that Senate Democrats and Republicans failed to reach an agreement on reforms, and opted instead last month to fund the bulk of DHS, while leaving out funds for ICE and parts of CBP—a split reflected in current strategy.
Both sides acknowledge the urgency of the funding crisis. Senate Majority Leader Thune warned after the Senate vote that other parts of the Homeland Security Department could run out of money before Congress completes the lengthy budget process, and told reporters he was hopeful the House will move forward soon with the funding for DHS, as agency officials warn that funding will dry up next month.
Objective Deep Dive

The budget resolution vote represents the culmination of a funding stalemate that began after two fatal federal agent shootings in Minneapolis prompted Democrats to demand immigration enforcement reforms. Months of bipartisan negotiations to end the DHS shutdown have faltered as Republicans rebuffed demands from Democrats to put limits on immigration enforcement operations following the killings of two American citizens in Minneapolis by immigration enforcement agents. Senate Democrats and Republicans failed to reach an agreement on reforms, and opted instead last month to fund the bulk of DHS, while leaving out funds for ICE and parts of CBP, but Republicans in the House refused to consider it, saying they wouldn't support any bill that didn't include money for immigration enforcement. This impasse forced Republicans to deploy budget reconciliation—a tool designed for expedited passage of legislation affecting revenues or mandatory spending—to circumvent the 60-vote threshold and fund immigration agencies without Democratic input.

Each side has legitimate procedural and policy claims. Democrats argue they are exercising appropriate oversight of law enforcement agencies following civilian deaths and seeking reasonable accountability measures that standard police departments employ. Republicans maintain that Democratic refusal to fund agencies they view as essential, combined with demands for policy changes that effectively defund operations, leaves reconciliation as the only path forward—a tool both parties have historically used when facing obstructionism. The resolution itself—a 50-48 vote with two GOP defections—suggests significant underlying disagreement even within the Republican coalition, with Sen. Murkowski opposing the resolution because it would set up funding outside the annual appropriations process and move agencies outside Congress' yearly funding and oversight role, while Sen. Paul voted no after arguing Senate Republicans should not approve another $70 billion for ICE and Border Patrol while the agencies still have more than $100 billion in unobligated funding, saying 'Congress ought to fund border security but we should be good stewards of the taxpayer dollars'.

The immediate question is whether the House adopts the same budget framework, which Republican leadership wants to avoid further delays. There's already been a push from some House Republicans to expand the scope of the effort, something that could complicate leadership's plans, as any changes the House makes would then have to go back to the Senate, where the chamber would have to undertake another vote-a-rama. Whether House Republicans would be willing to abide by that plan remained an open question, as some House conservatives have bristled at the notion of having to fund the department in two pieces, and Speaker Mike Johnson has said the House would need to pass the reconciliation bill for immigration enforcement funding first, before taking up the Senate-passed bill for the rest of the department. Trump's June 1 deadline adds pressure but does not guarantee success.

◈ Tone Comparison

Democratic messaging employed stark language characterizing immigration agencies as 'Donald Trump's private army' and 'unchecked rogue agencies', while focusing on cost-of-living comparisons to create a stark values contrast. Republican messaging emphasized border security achievements and characterized Democratic opposition as 'obnoxious obstructionism', framing the resolution as a necessary procedural solution rather than a discretionary choice.