The U.S. Senate passed $70 billion for ICE and Border Patrol. They also tried to ban something called Trump's "anti-weaponization" fund. That second part failed. So the government now has money for deportations and money for whatever anti-weaponization means. Nobody knows what that means. The people who voted don't know. The people writing about it don't know. You definitely don't know.
Here's what happened. Nearly all seventy billion dollars goes to DHS enforcement agencies. They're carrying out what the article calls "vigorous deportations." Vigorous. That's the word they picked. Like ICE agents are doing CrossFit between raids. Someone in communications earned their paycheck with that one.
The ban on the anti-weaponization fund failed. Which means the Senate said yes to funding the thing but no to not funding the other thing. Parliamentary procedure makes perfect sense. Everyone involved went to law school and this is what they produced. Your cousin who day-trades Tesla options has better decision-making frameworks.
Trump created something called an anti-weaponization fund. The name suggests it prevents weaponization. Or maybe it weaponizes anti-weapons. Could go either way. The Senate couldn't ban it. Too complicated. Easier to just approve seventy billion dollars for immigration enforcement and call it a day.
DHS now has more money than most countries' entire budgets. They'll use it to be vigorous. Very vigorous. The most vigorous agency in government. Meanwhile that mysterious fund nobody can define or eliminate continues existing in the budget like a line item from a fever dream.
Retail traders are currently analyzing this news to determine sector rotation strategies. They're looking at private prison stocks. Checking defense contractor earnings. Drawing lines on charts that connect the Senate vote to cryptocurrency somehow. They've convinced themselves this seventy billion dollars contains alpha. It doesn't. None of this matters for your portfolio. The Senate just funded agencies the same way they do every year while failing to defund something they probably should have defined first.
But sure, the anti-weaponization fund sounds important.
Photo by Caleb Fisher on Unsplash
Leave a Comment