New Bill Proposal to Reinstate DHS Funding and Election Security Measures

On Monday, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) introduced a bill aimed at reinstating a 60-day funding measure for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). He attached this to the SAVE America Act, stressing that some House Republicans remain committed to election security, even as the Senate appears to be favoring a reconciliation approach.

Roy’s legislation seeks to merge a continuing resolution, which the House had previously passed, that would extend DHS funding for another two months. It also proposes requirements for voter registration, including proof of citizenship and voter ID, while limiting universal mail-in ballots to specific situations like illness or military service. Additionally, the bill aims to protect women’s sports and restrict transgender surgeries for minors.

The bill, titled the “Homeland Security and Further Supplemental Continuing Appropriations Act of 2026,” consists of three main sections: full-year appropriations for DHS, additional continuing resolutions, and the SAVE America Act. Its provisions would modify the current temporary funding law to last through the specified effective date, with DHS funding set to expire beginning on February 14, 2026.

Furthermore, this proposal rejects the current DHS funding framework by including clauses that state U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) operations would receive “no enforcement or effect.” It specifies that all amounts in the DHS appropriations schedule would be set to zero, blocking any funding for border enforcement operations.

In an exclusive statement, Roy emphasized that House Republicans had acted responsibly in passing the SAVE America Act multiple times, asserting that compromising with Democrats could endanger funding for ICE and Border Patrol. He believes that passing his bill is crucial, stating that it would also advance the SAVE America Act, which he views as vital for securing elections and funding essential governmental functions.

The text of the bill would implement the citizenship verification measures from the SAVE America Act. It outlines acceptable documents as valid U.S. passports, REAL ID-compliant IDs that confirm citizenship, or certain military and government-issued IDs indicating birth in the U.S.

Roy’s proposal is in response to President Donald Trump’s repeated calls for a DHS funding deal that includes the SAVE America Act. Trump expressed skepticism about agreeing to any funding arrangements unless they encompass this act. On March 22, he remarked that while Democrats sought a compromise, he didn’t believe a deal should be made unless the SAVE America Act was approved. He reiterated this sentiment on his Truth Social platform, urging Republicans to pass the Act without negotiation.

On March 26, Trump further called upon Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster if necessary in order to secure DHS funding and push through the SAVE America Act. He emphasized the importance of stopping the filibuster to incorporate all necessary items into the legislative agenda.

The situation has become contentious between the House and Senate over DHS funding. On March 27, House conservatives rejected a Senate bill that omitted funding for ICE operations and CBP. Subsequently, Speaker Mike Johnson reached an agreement for a temporary 60-day measure to fully fund DHS, including ICE and CBP, after discussions with the House Freedom Caucus.

Roy had previously indicated that the Senate’s proposal was not acceptable, warning that House Republicans would return it with concerns over ICE and CBP support. He argued that funding for DHS should be tied to stricter voter ID and border security measures.

However, the Senate is increasingly looking to resolve ICE and border funding through budget reconciliation, which would require only a simple majority. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has suggested that this path is likely after the DHS package is addressed.

Despite earlier indications that he might be open to a compromise, Roy now considers relying on settlements for DHS funding as “dangerous.” He argues that such moves could jeopardize normal appropriations processes and delay essential funding. If Democrats uphold their stance against DHS funding, which may eventually require reconciliation, he believes it could set a troubling precedent.