WASHINGTON -- President-elect Donald Trump on Friday tweeted that Mexico will reimburse U.S. taxpayers for a new border wall and that U.S. money spent will be for the "sake of speed."
RELATED ARTICLES
http://www.arkansas…">Spy report: Putin order pro-Trump http://www.arkansas…">Electoral vote formally certified
His tweet came as congressional Republicans and his top aides consider a plan to ask Congress to ensure money is available in the U.S. budget for the wall without passing any new legislation. Instead, they would rely on existing law that authorizes fencing and other technology along the southern border.
The approach was disclosed Thursday by two congressional officials and a senior transition official with knowledge of the discussions; all spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.
Trump said in a tweet early Friday: "The dishonest media does not report that any money spent on building the Great Wall (for sake of speed), will be paid back by Mexico later!" Mexico's president and other senior officials have insisted that Mexico won't pay for a wall.
[TRUMP: Timeline of president-elect’s career + list of appointments so far]
During his campaign, Trump repeatedly told voters if elected he would build a wall along the U.S. southern border and make Mexico pay for it.
But Trump never settled on a mechanism for how Mexico would pay. He floated various options, including compelling the country to cover the cost through higher visa and border crossing fees and threatening to target billions of dollars in remittances sent home by immigrants living in the U.S.
Trump transition spokesman Sean Spicer said putting U.S. money upfront "doesn't mean he's broken his promise." In an interview Friday on ABC's Good Morning America, Spicer said: "I think he's going to continue to talk to them [Mexican government officials] about that."
He added, "It's going to take a little time."
The "tweet was engendered by people in the media," former Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway, who has been chosen to be a White House counselor to Trump, said Friday on Fox News. Suggestions that he's breaking his promise are "not true." Trump is "going to build that wall and Mexico is going to pay for it. That hasn't changed," she said.
"Congress is examining ways," Conway added, "to have the wall paid for through their auspices." Trump "will have Mexico pay it back," she said.
Spending Authority
It's not clear how much could be done along the 2,000-mile border without additional actions by Congress.
A number of Republican lawmakers believe that Trump has authority under the Secure Fence Act of 2006 to commence construction on a wall. That law, backed by President George W. Bush, mandated 700 miles of "reinforced fencing" along the U.S.-Mexico border along with enhanced surveillance systems that came to be known as a "virtual fence." Most of those 700 miles have already been built. Some areas are in much better shape than others, though, and long stretches are made up of fencing that stops vehicles but not pedestrians.
That law would allow Congress, without passing a new piece of legislation, to start funding the wall through the normal appropriations process. Current federal spending authority expires April 28, and Republicans could push to include border-wall funding in any spending legislation that would follow. While Democrats could well block a separate border-wall bill, it would be more difficult for them to block spending legislation, thus risking a government shutdown.
Several high-profile Democrats, including then-Sen. Barack Obama and current Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, voted for the Secure Fence Act.
"It's an existing law that hasn't been implemented, in part based on the ideology and philosophy of the outgoing president," said Rep. Luke Messer, R-Ind., chairman of the House Republican Policy Committee, who said he was one of several lawmakers pushing the approach. "It's not a silver-bullet solution to border security, but it's certainly a good start."
Several lawmakers and congressional officials said the administration could have significant flexibility in taking additional steps without Congress' approval.
"There's a lot of things that can be done within current law," said Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla., a longtime proponent of an immigration overhaul, though he emphasized that a lasting solution on immigration would take action by Congress. "You cannot minimize the potential impact of the administration doing what they can do under the law," he said.
Key policy decisions have not yet been made -- where to start building, for instance, or whether the barrier ought to be a fence or a solid wall. Messer said a broader border security bill could follow a move to start spending on a wall.
"It would be a proposal that would cost billions of dollars to get done, but if it's an appropriate priority for our country, it's worth spending that kind of money," Messer said.
Another lawmaker, Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, a fierce opponent of illegal immigration, said he did not know precisely how Trump wanted to proceed with the wall but speculated on what his considerations might be.
"I think what he's asking is: What do you have now? What are the assets we have to work with, and what are the challenges for right-of-way acquisition?" King said. "What are the tools they have within the departments? How much money is sitting around in the [Department of Homeland Security] that could be reallocated? What do they have in the books for design, and how much engineering have they done? He's got the authority to do a lot without moving legislation, but he wants to know what would require legislation."
King said he was not especially concerned that Congress, not the Mexican government, would be writing the first checks.
"If we build that wall, and Donald Trump hasn't figured out how to get Mexico to pay, I'm not going to be the guy who says, 'Let's wait until we get this in pesos,'" he said.
Information for this article was contributed by Erica Werner and Jill Colvin of The Associated Press; by Mike DeBonis and David Weigel of The Washington Post; and by Jennifer Epstein and Laura Litvan of Bloomberg News.
A Section on 01/07/2017