FBI facing defunding?

Republicans on a key subcommittee appear to be taking steps to defund the FBI, and by a historic proportion. Or are they merely pretending, knowing that a divided Congress will never go along with their proposal?

What the FBI faces under a proposed bill

The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies reported out their appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2024. (Text, and summary.)

According to The Washington Examiner, the bill would reduce funding for the FBI from $11.3 billion to $10.3 billion. That represents a cut of 8.9 percent, one of the deepest cuts ever seen for any agency. Forty percent of that represents cuts in salaries; the rest consists of spending limits.

The bill summary speaks of using “the power of the purse” to target not only the FBI but also the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Specifically the bill “defund[s]” ATF’s regulation of pistol braces and “privately made” firearms. (These would be firearms someone makes in his own gunsmith shop for his own or a close friend’s use.)

Republicans, in their “Top-line Messaging” section, mentioned several abusive practices at the FBI that they want to stop. They include:

• Attorney General Merrick Garland’s “School Board Memorandum,”
• Favoritism in “politically sensitive” investigations, and
• Taking part in censorship and labeling of “lawful speech” as “misinformation.”

Nor may the FBI use “construction balances” to build new headquarters for itself.

At the same time it provides for “robust funding” of several initiatives aimed at strengthening local law enforcement. Democrats on the subcommittee accused the majority of “defunding law enforcement.” In fact this bill might defund federal law enforcement only.

What else this bill does

Aside from the cuts at the FBI, this bill would defund at least 70 “unnecessary and wasteful” programs. Fourteen of these are “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion” initiatives. Republicans also mention defunding 15 different Executive Orders, including EO 14092, the federal “assault weapons” ban. The bill specifically rejects a proposal to “electrify” the vehicle fleets of the Departments of Justice and Commerce. Republicans estimate they’ll save $54 million by scrapping that initiative. In fact the bill speaks of “reduc[ing] wasteful spending on climate change initiatives.”

Republicans also accuse the Justice Department of abusing the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act. Oddly enough, Christopher Wray went on record as acknowledging that 70 percent of clinic entrance blocking incidents today involve crisis pregnancy centers, not abortion mills. Obviously he didn’t convince anyone of his sincerity, so the new bill reduces funding for “DOJ litigating components.” Further along this line, the bill will include an explicit statement of the Hyde Principle. According to this, the federal government does not use taxpayer funds to pay for abortion.

But the bill does propose reinstatement and/or increases in spending in one area: countering mainland China. Direct war is not at issue here – but the bill does mention “support” for Project Artemis. Artemis, like Apollo before it, is a project to land crews on the Moon. Unlike Apollo, Artemis would establish a permanent human presence on the Moon. (Rumors have the Chinese planning to build its own Moon base – with nuclear power.)

What this bill does not mention

True enough, this bill mentions many things that have concerned conservatives (and a few libertarians) greatly. Besides treating concerned parents as domestic terrorists, the FBI took an active role in encouraging censorship by social media platforms. They also have shown clear favoritism, protecting the First (Extended) Family while persecuting conservatives of all stripes. Their non-cooperation with subpoenas drew special mention; the bill effectively garnishes the salaries of any employees who have a hand in such non-cooperation.

But the bill makes no mention of the practice of “salting” peaceful protests and inducing violence. The FBI has never acknowledged – and indeed clumsily disavowed – their most notorious agent provocateur, Ray Epps. Furthermore the FBI colluded with the Ukrainian secret service to censor content unfriendly to the Ukrainian side in their war.

And why could Jane Fonda actually threaten murder against the opponents of abortion, and rate no investigation by the FBI?

In short, the FBI has become a totalitarian political enforcement arm. If it still addresses any law-enforcement areas of legitimate concern, the Pinkerton Detective Agency could take them over – just as the FBI itself supplanted Pinkerton’s at its founding.

Will the FBI really face defunding?

On that question, lovers of liberty have plenty of room to doubt. Recall what happened when Republicans briefly took back the House of Representatives in 2011. Republicans proposed bill after bill to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – Obamacare. But for years, the House of Representatives proposed, and the Senate disposed. Then at last Republicans “flipped” the Senate in 2015. And … Congress took no action on Obamacare.

Today the same situation obtains: a Republican House but a Democratic Senate and President. Once again the House will propose and the Senate dispose. All of which will seem convenient – and will be. True enough, we’re talking about appropriations bills, which must pass. But have Republicans included these provisions merely to bargain away for special projects back home? Stay tuned.