The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation Wednesday aimed at cracking down on illegal immigrants accused of committing welfare fraud, approving the measure despite strong opposition from most Democrats.
Lawmakers voted 231-186 to pass the Deporting Fraudsters Act, with 186 Democrats voting against it.
Rep. David Taylor, R-Ohio, introduced the bill.
The legislation would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to explicitly classify fraud involving public benefits as a deportable offense.
Republicans said the measure is designed to ensure that noncitizens who defraud taxpayer-funded programs are removed from the country and barred from returning.
“If you admit to or you’re convicted of fraudulently receiving public benefits, you are out of here on the next plane and can never return,” Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., said during debate on the House floor.
Democrats also raised concerns about due process, arguing the bill could allow for deportation before a criminal conviction is secured.
They warned that such a provision could prevent alleged victims from having their cases heard in court.
The House has been busy this week.
The House also approved legislation combining two proposals that have each received broad public support but also generated sharp partisan disagreement on Capitol Hill.
The vote exposed divisions over both election law and congressional ethics, with Republicans arguing the package reflects the priorities of most Americans while Democrats criticized both the substance of the legislation and the decision to combine the two issues into a single bill.
The House voted 231-198 on Wednesday to pass legislation that would ban members of Congress and their immediate families from purchasing individual stocks while also establishing new federal voter identification requirements.
Every Republican except a handful supported the package, while 198 Democrats voted against it.
Only 13 House Democrats joined Republicans in voting for the measure.
The legislation combines two proposals that Republican leaders had debated separately for months before merging them into a single bill.
Supporters argued that the public widely backs both measures.
Rep. Zach Nunn, R-Iowa, one of the bill’s leading supporters, said the two issues “go hand in hand.”
“One, the overwhelming majority of Americans want this. Two, it’s something that we can get passed this week that gets it into the president’s hands before the August return-to-district period,” Nunn said.
Responding to Democratic criticism, Nunn added, “Only in Washington can you have two wins for 90% of Americans, and Democrats will say that’s one win too many.”
Rep. Stephanie Bice, R-Okla., also defended the legislation’s congressional stock trading provisions.
“The American people deserve to know their elected officials are serving the public, not their own financial interests,” Bice said.
The stock trading portion would prohibit lawmakers and their immediate families from purchasing additional individual stocks.
Current holdings would not have to be immediately sold, though lawmakers would be required to follow public disclosure rules before selling existing investments.
The legislation also allows members to continue using qualified blind trusts.
The voter identification section would require voters to provide government-issued identification, including for certain mail-in voting procedures.
Republicans argued the changes would strengthen election integrity and increase public confidence in federal elections.
Democrats opposed both portions of the legislation, though for different reasons.
Rep. Joe Morelle, D-N.Y., said Democrats support banning congressional stock trading but objected that the legislation does not extend the restrictions to the president, vice president, federal judges or their families.
He argued the bill before the House failed to go far enough while also criticizing the voter ID provisions as unnecessary restrictions on voting.
Democrats have specifically objected to extending identification requirements to mail-in voting, arguing the changes could make it more difficult for eligible Americans to cast ballots.
Some progressive lawmakers also criticized the stock trading language because it does not require members of Congress to immediately divest existing stock holdings.
Some Republicans opposed combining the two issues into one package.
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., argued that attaching voter ID provisions made bipartisan passage of a congressional stock trading ban less likely.
