This week the Senate was billed as a return to open debate and amendment votes in an effort to find compromise on the thorny issue of immigration.
But as of Wednesday, no substantive votes had been held, and the Senate quickly returned to its normal practice of hashing out a pre-set vote script behind the scenes, while Senate staffers held quorum calls in a mostly empty chamber.
By midweek, what many in the press hoped would be “freewheeling” had turned into dull and plodding.
Thursday will likely determine whether the week will also be tagged with another harsh label: fruitless. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., set up votes on four competing immigration proposals, and it wasn’t clear as of Wednesday night if any of them had the 60 votes needed to pass.
The problems the Senate faced this week can be traced back to January. Then, McConnell promised some kind of vote on immigration to Democrats as a condition of getting them to agree to reopen the government after a brief three-day shutdown.
But McConnell never promised a successful vote and, without any broad political agreement between the two parties, there were no guarantees the Senate could pass anything.
The process was hindered from the start by hiccups and roadblocks that reflected the ongoing disagreement on immigration. Late Monday, Senate Democrats said they were excited at the prospect of holding open votes to see where each senator stood on various immigration proposals.
“It really is exciting to think about that men and women elected to this body, known as the greatest deliberative body in America, are finally going to deliberate,” said Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill.
But by Tuesday afternoon, Democrats found themselves blocking a proposal from McConnell to first take up a bill aimed at punishing so-called “sanctuary cities.” A perplexed McConnell told reporters he thought Democrats wanted this debate, while Democrats said sanctuary-city language was out of bounds.
The Senate closed up shop Tuesday without any votes.
On Wednesday, several senators made the case for a narrower immigration bill than what President Trump was looking for.
Trump wants border wall funding, protection for 1.8 million so-called “Dreamers,” and an end to chain migration and the diversity visa lottery. But a bipartisan group of senators said border security and Dreamer protection alone might have a chance.
The trouble is, no one had any proof. Supporters of this kind of “skinny” immigration bill couldn’t say they had the 60 votes needed for passage even as of late Wednesday.
But no one else could either. The Senate spent Wednesday working on a plan for some kind of vote process and closed up again without any voting.
Late Wednesday, however, McConnell set up votes that could happen as early as Thursday, but on four proposals that could each fail.
There’s a bill reflecting Trump’s tough immigration plan, from Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, which Democrats will oppose.
There’s a bill from Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Chris Coons, D-Del., that would only help the Dreamers and fund a fraction of the border security that most Republicans are looking for.
There’s the sanctuary city bill, which Democrats loathe.
And then there’s a bipartisan bill that most believe has the best shot of passage. It only focuses on border security and the Dreamers, but it at least meets GOP demands for border security funding over several years.
Passage of that bill would look and feel like a Senate victory, especially after the Senate process fell short of what many were expecting this week.
But that victory would likely be short-lived. House conservatives are already warning that Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., would be in trouble if he called up what they see as a weak Senate bill. And if that impossible hurdle could be overcome, the White House has indicated Trump would veto any bill that doesn’t reflect the “four pillars” he has set out.
All of which might signal the Senate: even a little bit of freewheeling is too much.
