Shutdown Talks Stall Over Detention Beds

Brendan Fitterer/Tampa Bay Times/ZUMA

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

So how are the shutdown talks going? Apparently we’ve moved past the funding for a wall, so you’d think it would be pretty smooth sailing now. But apparently not:

The talks this weekend snagged over the issue of how many detention beds would be provided at the border for housing people detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials….Democrats had proposed establishing a new limit on detention beds used by ICE officials when apprehending people for violations within the U.S., known as interior enforcement. Those beds would be capped at 16,500, as part of an existing overall cap of 40,520 beds funded in the fiscal year 2018 spending bill.

The idea is the limit would force the government to prioritize the detention of violent criminals, rather than people who had overstayed their visas. Republicans objected, wanting to exclude violent criminals from that cap. Democrats said the exclusion would undermine their objective.

After reading a dozen different accounts of the detention bed issue, I’m unable to parse exactly what this means. Prioritizing violent criminals sounds fine to me, but if that’s the goal why not allow unlimited detention beds for violent criminals and put a cap on the number of beds for visa overstayers? What am I missing here?

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest