WA Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez Among Seven Democrats To Vote To Increase ICE Funding

On Thursday, seven Democrats betrayed their party and the overwhelming outcry from the American public by voting to pass a bill giving the Department of Homeland Security a whopping $64.4 billion. A stunning $10 billion of that will go to ICE, a rogue agency that continues to terrorize communities across the country. 

Washington’s very own Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez was among the seven Democrats as well as Reps. Henry Cuellar (Texas), Jared Golden (Maine),, Laura Gillen (N.Y.), Don Davis (N.C.), Tom Suozzi (N.Y.) and Vicente Gonzalez (Texas).

Washingtonians have come to expect that when a handful of Democrats vote for something egregious, Gluesenkamp Perez will be among them. This is the same lawmaker who took a whole week to respond to the state sanction killing of Renee Nicole Good, but immediately sent her regards publicly to a racist podcaster. This is the same lawmaker who sided with the right wing on the Laken Riley Act, who approved the censure of Congress’s only Palestinians member, who supported strip searches for immigrant children, who voted to try 14 year olds as adults,

At least this time she feels compelled to explain herself.

In a statement released shortly after the vote, Gluesenkamp Perez said she “could not in good conscience vote to shut [DHS] down,” because it also houses the Coast Guard and FEMA.

“When fishermen in Pacific County get in trouble out on the water, the Coast Guard makes sure they’re safe. When there’s flooding or landslides in Southwest Washington, FEMA helps our families get back on their feet,” Gluesenkamp wrote. “The Department of Homeland Security is extremely important to my community.” 

Gluesenkamp Perez argued that even if she voted with her party (and undoubtedly on the right side of history), ICE would keep operating due to funding from the One Big Beautiful Bill. She's basically trying to say that the Dems who voted "no" did so as a virtue signal, which is potentially true for many, especially knowing that they had no chance of killing the funding bill in the minority. But, the issue with accusing your opposition of virtue signaling against something is that it often reveals that you understand yourself to be virtue signaling in favor of that same thing.

And the re-election anxiety really jumped out for purple district Gluesenkamp Perez when she staked out a spectacularly centrist position on what will one day be considered one the many low moments of American history. 

“Many in my community, myself included, believe the Administration was on the right track when they pledged to secure our borders and uphold law and order,” she said, all but confessing she’s afraid a Republican will beat her in November. 

She’s careful to not assign any blame to ICE agents, echoing historic arguments that a certain group of evil dudes were “just following orders.”

“However, it now appears to many of us that in pursuit of politically motivated removal goals and rushed timelines, federal law enforcement is being pressured to exercise overly aggressive tactics that endanger law enforcement and civilians,” she wrote. “This is corrosive to the long term security and stability of our great country.” 

And then of course, finish off by calling progressives unreasonable. 

“Indiscriminate, overly aggressive slogans like ‘Defund ICE’ are not the solutions,” Gluesenkamp Perez wrote. “We should not be forced into a false choice between having no border security and arresting US citizens.”

Gluesenkamp Perez, many wish anyone in your party would act “overly aggressive” on ICE. But truly, they are not taking this moment all that seriously. Afterall, the Democrats will expect you to celebrate that $20 million of ICE’s new funding will go toward body cameras. They negotiated a $115 million cut for ICE enforcement and removal operations plus a 5,500 reduction in ICE detention beds. Yipee!