Paul Ryan urges Republicans to back travel ban despite anger over its rollout
|
Version 0 of 1. Paul Ryan has urged Republicans to stand by Donald Trump’s travel ban on people from seven Muslim-majority countries, throwing his support behind the restrictive policy despite its mixed reactions from lawmakers on Capitol Hill. “The president has a responsibility to the security of this country,” the House speaker told reporters on Tuesday, in his first public comments on the executive order. “What is happening is something that we support, which is we need to pause, and we need to make sure that the vetting standards are up to snuff, so that we can guarantee the safety and security of this country. That is what this does.” Ryan also issued a strong defense of Trump’s action in a closed-door meeting with Republicans on Tuesday morning, according to some lawmakers in attendance. The House speaker acknowledged the controversy surrounding the ban and told his members they were likely to see protests in their districts. Ryan’s backing of Trump came as many Republicans criticized the new administration for failing to consult Congress on an action that produced chaos and uncertainty across the US government. Ryan said he only learned of the executive order as it was being issued, while characterizing the confusion stemming from its abrupt rollout as “regrettable”. Republicans returning to Washington on Monday after a party retreat in Philadelphia last week were visibly frustrated by the hasty manner in which Trump’s executive order was unveiled. The order suspended all refugee admissions to the US for 120 days, indefinitely barred entry to Syrian refugees, and banned many immigrants and travelers for at least 90 days from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Top Republicans said they were neither consulted nor briefed before the issuance of the new policy, which was signed by the president on Friday afternoon but not publicly disclosed until later that evening. Some said they were still struggling to get answers three days later, underscoring the chasm that has yet to be bridged between Trump and the Republicans who control both chambers of Congress. Bob Corker, the Republican who chairs the Senate foreign relations committee, warned that lawmakers might step in and take legislative action to circumvent the order if the Trump administration did not address its shortcomings in the coming days. “I think they understand it was a misfire here,” Corker told reporters on Monday evening. “Obviously the communication was not there. The agency process was not there. Folks here on the Hill were not aware of what was getting ready to happen. “People around the world were not aware. Chaos ensued,” he added. Senator Marco Rubio said his office had sought clarity from the state department but was told the agency “was ordered not to talk to Congress about this issue”. “I suppose it’s because [they’re] not clear what to tell us yet, but that cannot be a permanent position. We expect answers here fairly soon because we have constituents calling,” said Rubio, whose home state of Florida relies heavily on tourism. Rubio also questioned the need to terminate, even if temporarily, the entire US refugee resettlement program. “I’m concerned about refugees all over the world, irrespective of the seven countries,” the former presidential contender said. “These are very vulnerable people in very dangerous places.” An aide to Rubio confirmed the senator’s office had been denied a briefing by the state department on Monday when seeking answers to specific questions about the travel ban. The agency later provided a generic document with responses to frequently asked questions. Rubio’s complaints ran counter to what Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, said earlier in the day. Spicer pointedly responded to reporters at the White House briefing when asked about lawmakers being left in the dark: “There were staff from appropriate committees and leadership offices that were involved.” Some Republicans, such as Johnny Isakson of Georgia, sought to give the new administration the benefit of the doubt. Isakson told reporters Trump’s team probably did not foresee the immediate impact the order would have. But when asked by the Guardian if he wished the White House had conferred with Congress, Isakson conceded: “That would help, yes.” Isakson said it was particularly troubling that the Department of Homeland Security had not been provided guidance in advance, deeming it “a slip-up” for the administration to not even brief the agency that would be tasked with executing the order. Rory Cooper, a former Republican leadership aide, said it was “astounding” that the administration did not offer a heads up even to members of its own party. “It goes to a broader point which is that the president is simply just not surrounded by people with the expertise or experience to provide him with the adequate counsel, like informing Congress or doing the due diligence of an agency review,” Cooper said. “There’s really no excuse other than the arrogance on the part of a few advisers.” Alex Conant, a Republican strategist and former adviser to Rubio, said the party was eager to forge a relationship with the new president. But in order to do so, they would need cooperation from Trump – particularly on such a sweeping action where Republicans lacked the information they needed to defend his shift in policy. “They think they’re all on the same team,” Conant said, “but when he acts without any coordination, it puts Congress in a bind, because they’re not able to be effective surrogates on his behalf.” For many in the GOP, the lack of information proved challenging in the face of sharp condemnation from Democrats and civil rights groups, who were quick to decry the policy as a scaled-back version of the “Muslim ban” upon which Trump had campaigned. Most Republicans, like the Trump administration, disagreed with that characterization, casting the issue as a matter of national security. “He genuinely believes that we may be allowing dangerous people into the country,” said Thom Tillis, a senator from North Carolina. But the text of the executive order made explicit that the US government would prioritize religious minorities in Muslim-majority countries upon resuming its admittance of refugees. The president has himself said non-Muslim religious minorities would be prioritized for entry to the US in an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network on Friday. Even so, Tillis urged the administration to narrow the focus of the executive order – saying green card holders and those who had served with the US military as interpreters or in other roles should not be barred from coming in. Rand Paul, who ran unsuccessfully for president in 2016, said his only real issue with the implementation of the order was its initial effect of stranding even those with green cards. Otherwise, Paul said of immigrants: “You don’t have a right to come here. We have a right to make rules on who comes.” Another 2016 contender, Senator Ted Cruz, commended Trump “for acting swiftly to try to prevent terrorists from infiltrating our refugee programs”. “In contrast to the hysteria and mistruths being pushed by the liberal media, President Trump’s executive order implements a four-month pause in refugee admissions so that stronger vetting procedures can be put in place,” the Texas senator said. Nonetheless, a growing chorus of Republicans were critical of the order’s scope, saying it was overly broad and played into the hands of terrorist groups such as Islamic State. John McCain and Lindsey Graham, two of the party’s leading voices on foreign policy, called it a “self-inflicting wound” in a joint statement. “This executive order sends a signal, intended or not, that America does not want Muslims coming into our country,” McCain and Graham said. “That is why we fear this executive order may do more to help terrorist recruitment than improve our security.” Dean Heller, a Republican from Nevada, said he was “deeply troubled by the appearance of a religious ban”. Whether Republicans planned to translate their words of caution into action remained unclear, however. Democrats promptly introduced a bill on Monday that would rescind Trump’s order, but most Republicans said they would wait to see how the administration proceeded before taking matters into their own hands. |