Failed
212 Yea217 Nay3 Not voting1/2 required
HR-7744-119
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
Sponsored by Tom Cole (R-OK)
What it does
This bill would provide full-year FY2026 appropriations to the Department of Homeland Security, funding all major DHS components through the end of the fiscal year. It would end the partial DHS shutdown that began on February 14, 2026, when a prior continuing resolution expired without a replacement. The bill would also authorize back pay for federal employees affected by the shutdown and ratify obligations incurred during the shutdown period to maintain essential operations.
Who benefits
Federal employees at DHS agencies (CBP, ICE, TSA, Coast Guard, Secret Service, FEMA, CISA, and others) who would receive back pay and restored salaries. Contractors and vendors who provide services to DHS and were awaiting payment. Travelers who rely on TSA airport screening and Coast Guard maritime safety operations. Communities that depend on FEMA disaster preparedness and response funding. Businesses and ports that rely on CBP trade and border processing. Cybersecurity-dependent industries and critical infrastructure operators served by CISA.
Who is hurt
Taxpayers who bear the cost of the full-year appropriation, including back pay obligations incurred during the shutdown. Competing federal priorities that may face tighter discretionary spending caps as a result of this allocation. Advocacy groups or legislators who preferred different funding levels — either higher or lower — for specific DHS components such as immigration enforcement or border security. State and local governments that may have absorbed costs during the shutdown period that are not reimbursed.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that funding DHS is a core constitutional obligation of Congress and that the partial shutdown created real operational gaps — TSA screeners, Coast Guard personnel, and Border Patrol agents worked without pay, degrading morale and potentially compromising national security. They contend that restoring full-year funding provides budget certainty that allows DHS components to plan operations, hire staff, and execute contracts that a patchwork of continuing resolutions cannot support.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that passing a full-year appropriations bill without sufficient scrutiny of individual line items allows wasteful or controversial spending to continue unchecked, and that the shutdown — while disruptive — represented legitimate congressional leverage to negotiate changes to DHS priorities or spending levels. They contend that ratifying shutdown-era obligations without a detailed accounting sets a precedent that reduces Congress's ability to use the appropriations process as an oversight tool.
Failed
Passed