GOP infighting and indecision is already threatening to disintegrate the border deal, even before Senate negotiators release the long-awaited bill text.

As senators returned for a critical two-week sprint in D.C. before a lengthy recess, Republicans are starting to doubt whether the agreement — which would be tied to billions in foreign aid — can pass their chamber. GOP leaders first set out to find a compromise that could win a majority of Republican senators over, but that’s only grown more challenging as conservatives, Speaker Mike Johnson and former President Donald Trump hammer the deal.

Asked if the agreement appears to be on a path toward passing the Senate, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) replied: “It certainly doesn’t seem like it.”

“There are a number of our members who say, ‘Well, I’ll join a majority of the Republicans but if it doesn’t enjoy that sort of support, then count me out,’” Cornyn said in an interview. “The whole idea of passing something that the House won’t even take up is another challenge.”

There are two main reasons for the growing questions about the bill’s future: Trump’s attacks and Johnson’s vows not to take it up. And the two seem related; Johnson said Tuesday he had talked to Trump about the issue “at length” though he denied they are opposing it for political reasons.

It’s a frustrating nadir for a senators in both parties, who have spent more than three months trying to connect an immigration and border deal with billions in Ukraine funding. Republicans, including Johnson, explicitly demanded that Ukraine funding can’t move before border security policies. Now, it seems they’ve cooled on any bipartisan deal at all, and are instead demanding that Biden use his existing executive powers to secure the border.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said that Johnson is trying to kill the bill in the Senate so he doesn’t have to deal with his own complicated politics.

“He would probably love for this to die in this Senate so that he doesn’t have to answer to his members who want Ukraine funding,” Murphy said.

And Johnson’s position has a real effect on Senate Republicans, who may need to provide a dozen or more votes just to clear the 60-vote threshold — depending on how many Democrats defect. But it needs more GOP votes than that for any hope of moving the House.

Those dynamics have raised a persistent and frustrating question among some plugged-in Republicans: Will this even come to the Senate floor?

“The very people who demanded that we have something on the border as part of the supplemental, suddenly all these months later say they don’t want something on the border,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), who hasn’t committed to voting either way. “The fact, by the way, that the House may not take it up even if we do pass it. That’s not irrelevant. Why would a bunch of us spend political capital on a cause that can’t pass?”

Cramer praised Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) for leading negotiations on a deal and keeping the conference informed, lamenting that “now a bunch of Republican senators are throwing him under the bus because it’s more convenient politically than explaining the merits of it.”

Johnson and conservatives have criticized the agreement for not automatically kicking in the border shutdown authorities until migrant encounters crest an average of 5,000 per day. Meanwhile, the text of the bill is still under wraps, allowing the party’s right flank to continuously rile up the base by speculating the legislation will only be a boon to Democrats.

Sens. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) were among the senators on Tuesday criticizing the agreement and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s leadership. McConnell appointed Lankford to lead the Republican negotiations.

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) indicated that Russia could be behind some of the messaging against the bill: “I suspect that a lot of the internet rumors are very well coming from overseas, where they would love to see this shut down because some people would rather not see funding for Ukraine.”

“You’ve got a narrative out there that is taking hold, not really founded in facts. But I think at some point unless you’re able to win the debate based on the merits of the policy, that the hill is getting steeper,” said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a Lankford ally.

Several members of GOP leadership were noncommittal on Tuesday about the legislation amid the fierce political crosscurrents, and Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), who runs the party’s campaign arm, said he’s heard some “real concerns” from constituents. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) said senators are “really anxious” to see the actual text and that she couldn’t divulge her leaning until then.

“People ought to wait and see all the provisions that James [Lankford] has negotiated. And then they’ll realize that it’s an enormous improvement over the current crisis,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine).

Yet even when text comes out, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said it will have “to be public for quite a long time” before it can advance. The Senate is scheduled to go on a two-week recess at the end of next week.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has repeatedly suggested a vote could take place soon. Meanwhile, a House committee is working to advance articles of impeachment against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who consulted closely with Senate negotiators.

“Are they going to impeach him because people are coming across the border? Then pass the goddamn bill,” said a frustrated Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). “Then you might have some talking points if he doesn’t follow through on it.”

Ursula Perano contributed to this report.

The House passed legislation Tuesday that would increase penalties for undocumented immigrants who flee from border security agents using a motor vehicle by a 271-154 vote.

Fifty-six Democrats backed the measure.

The legislation, sponsored by border-state Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-Ariz.), would expand those penalties if the chase results in death or serious injury — and would make any immigrant convicted of such a crime ineligible for legal status in the U.S.

The bill is named after Border Patrol Agent Raul Gonzalez, Jr., who passed away in 2022 after his vehicle crashed while pursuing several undocumented immigrants fleeing police.

The action comes amid ongoing hostility among some Republicans toward an emerging Senate border security compromise recently endorsed by President Joe Biden.

House Republicans took a critical step early Wednesday toward impeaching Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as they project confidence they’ll be able to recommend booting the Cabinet official on the House floor.

The House Homeland Security Committee voted 18-15 to advance articles of impeachment, which accuse Mayorkas of “breach of trust” and “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law.” The vote paves the way for the impeachment articles to come to the floor next week — depending on absences and if Republicans can shore up a swath of undecided members.

Chair Mark Green (R-Tenn.) has publicly been cagey about whether he’ll ultimately be able to impeach Mayorkas. But he was overheard Monday night saying that he has the votes — a prediction he also made during a recent TV interview.

However, it’s still not clear they currently have the necessary near-unanimous support. Given united Democratic opposition and an incredibly thin majority, Republicans can only afford to lose two votes at full attendance. Green is expected to meet with some of the holdouts this week. And Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) said leadership will also check in with members this week, but that he “imagined” they will ultimately have the votes.

Impeaching Mayorkas from office would be a historic step — a Cabinet official has only been impeached once before, in 1876 — but would certainly end without a conviction in the Democratic-controlled Senate. Lawmakers in the upper chamber are currently trying to negotiate a border security deal with the Biden administration, including Mayorkas, which House Republicans have repeatedly signaled they plan to spike.

“We are here today not because we want to be but because we have exhausted all other options. … Secretary Mayorkas’ actions have forced our hand,” Green said during Tuesday’s committee meeting.

Republicans’ charges against Mayorkas include: He didn’t uphold immigration laws, exceeded his authority, risked public safety, made false statements to Congress and obstructed congressional oversight as well as the construction of the U.S.-Mexico border wall.

Mayorkas, in a letter to Green on Tuesday morning, called those allegations “baseless and inaccurate.” And he defended the department, saying that DHS has “provided Congress and your committee hours of testimony, thousands of documents, hundreds of briefings and much more information that demonstrates quite clearly how we are enforcing the law.”

The right flank has exerted intense pressure on House Republicans to impeach President Joe Biden or a top administration official. A previous attempt to impeach Mayorkas last year failed, when firebrand Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) forced the matter to the House floor. Eight GOP lawmakers voted to refer the matter to Green’s committee, which was already conducting a long-term investigation into Mayorkas.

Most of those eight are expected to back impeaching Mayorkas now. But Republicans view two as their most likely “no” votes: Reps. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) and Tom McClintock (R-Calif.). McClintock told reporters Tuesday that he was waiting to see what came out of the committee, but has previously warned that he didn’t think Mayorkas’ behavior met the bar of an impeachable offense. Buck, meanwhile, described himself as a “lean no.”

And there are other undecided votes outside those eight, as well, including Reps. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) and David Joyce (R-Ohio). Newhouse told POLITICO on Monday night that he was waiting to see what came out of the committee, while Joyce is expected to meet with Green on Wednesday.

But leadership picked up at least one notable flip on Monday night when Biden-district Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who had been undecided, told reporters that he would now back impeaching Mayorkas.

“I think there’s been a dereliction of duty. There’s laws that have not been complied with and we’re suffering one of the worst crises in our country,” Bacon said.

Many of those holdouts had expressed skepticism that investigators have met the bar of a high crime or misdemeanor, a concern shared by legal scholars. Democrats have staunchly opposed attempts to impeach Mayorkas, laying out that argument in a 29-page report they released on Monday pre-butting the committee’s vote.

“House Republicans have produced no evidence that Secretary Mayorkas has broken the law. This is a political stunt and a hit job ordered by two people: Donald Trump and Marjorie Taylor Greene,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told reporters on Monday.

Olivia Beavers contributed reporting.

It’s no longer just conservatives threatening to block floor action when they don’t get their way.

A group of four New York lawmakers threw a tranche of unrelated bills into limbo Tuesday afternoon, trying to squeeze GOP leadership to make changes to a tax proposal that Speaker Mike Johnson had hoped to pass through the chamber quickly. They were considering opposing a so-called rule vote, which would have ground floor action to a halt. It’s a tactic conservatives have embraced in recent months, when they feel leadership isn’t properly prioritizing their goals.

And while Johnson was ultimately able to stave off another episode of the near-constant chaos that consumes his thin majority, the centrist coalition is threatening to tank other bills as the talks with Johnson drag on.

“The point that has been made multiple times this Congress is that there are strength in numbers. But for us that delivered the majority, this is the issue that matters,” Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) said, asked if the group would use a similar hardball tactic in the future.

The group of New York Republicans and members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus — who have their own issues with the tax bill — are now expected to meet with Johnson and members of the Ways & Means Committee, which negotiated the bipartisan tax bill, later Tuesday as they try to figure out a path forward.

New York Republicans want some sort of fix to State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction to go along with the tax bill, a particular burden to their constituents where property taxes are higher. One involved Republican said Johnson and others are trying to temper the tensions amid an ongoing clash between the New Yorkers and other members of leadership.

Meanwhile, members of the Freedom Caucus are privately pushing leadership to make concessions over an expansion of the child tax credit.

“We’re having conversations about some of their concerns, some of our concerns and seeing if we can get a little kumbaya,” said Freedom Caucus member Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas).

House Republican leaders had been expected to call a vote on the bill this week, likely under suspension — a process that requires a two-thirds vote threshold but allows them to bypass GOP opponents by leaning on Democrats to help pass the bill.

That is leaving opponents of the tax bill looking for other points of leverage. Republicans threatening to tank their own party’s unrelated legislation has become a much more common practice this Congress, given frequent rebellions and an incredibly thin majority.

Conservative rabble rousers used the tactic under both Johnson and his predecessor Kevin McCarthy to express their displeasure over a debt deal last year and, more recently, short-term spending patches that have passed with Democratic support.

Some members left the vote shaking their heads, lamenting they can’t even do the basic practice of passing a rule these days. Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.) said they are “calling this the SALT rebellion.”

“It’s like the Whiskey Rebellion. Let’s see if the federal troops will crush it,” Zinke added, referring to tax protests on distilled spirits that turned violent when George Washington was president.

Katherine Tully McManus, Benjamin Guggenheim, Daniella Diaz and Nicholas Wu contributed reporting.

Speaker Mike Johnson on Tuesday savaged a bipartisan border security deal that senators are working to finalize this week, calling it insufficient to secure the southern border.

“It seems the authority to shut down the border would kick in only after as many as 5,000 illegal crossings happen a day. Why? Why would we do that?” he asked during a press conference. “That would be surrender. The goal should be zero illegal crossings a day.”

Asked about rumblings of the deal, which the speaker said he’s yet to see the text of, Johnson said: “I hope some of this is not true.” Johnson has repeatedly criticized the deal in the last week, saying in a statement it could be “dead on arrival” in the House if the rumors about its contents were true.

“What’s been suggested is in this bill is not enough to secure the border,” he added.

The bill’s advocates say that the actual amount of illegal crossings would be much lower. The Department of Homeland Security would be required to shut down illegal crossings if the daily average of encounters surpasses 5,000 migrants or if a one-day total surpasses 8,500. DHS would have the authority to shut the border down at 4,000 encounters per day, however, and Biden has signaled he would aggressively use that authority.

Once the mandatory shutdown is enforced, it would take two weeks of starkly lower illegal crossings (about 2,000) to reopen the border to crossings other than asylum appointments at ports of entry. As a result of high illegal crossing numbers, the border shutdown could continue for weeks or months until the numbers go down.

Johnson is due to deliver a floor speech on border security later on Tuesday. The speaker denied that House objections to the legislation was being done to aid former President Donald Trump in his bid to return to the White House.

“That’s absurd,” Johnson said. “We’re trying to use every ounce of leverage that we have to make sure this issue is addressed.”

Burgess Everett contributed to this report.

Battleground state senators typically slow down after winning a competitive race. But after two victories in a row, Mark Kelly is keeping his foot on the gas.

The Arizona Democrat is going all-out to help Senate Democrats keep their majority, traveling across the country to aid vulnerable colleagues. He raised $89 million for his own reelection campaign in 2022 (just two years after his first race), won both and is now trying to help his colleagues keep the majority for a third straight cycle.

“I’m not a take it easy kind of person,” he said in an interview Monday about his travels. “I’m gonna work really hard to do my part to [keep the Senate and the presidency]. And if that means traveling around, multiple times to a bunch of different states? Yeah, I’m gonna do that.”

Kelly visited two critical must-win battlegrounds over the weekend, helping raise six figures apiece for Sens. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). In three days, he visited Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Columbus and Cleveland, doing nine events.

To date, Kelly has raised or contributed more than $1.8 million for Democratic candidates and incumbents, as well as the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, since the start of the cycle. He’s doing events and contributing money for state parties in battlegrounds and has been to Montana, Michigan, Texas, Wisconsin and Virginia this cycle.

That’s a lot for someone who does not run Senate Democrats’ campaign arm and is not in party leadership.

“Do I like it? Uh, I’m OK with it. I like flying the space shuttle. I like flying airplanes off of an aircraft carrier. I flew an F-16 A few months ago. I liked that. That was fun. I’m OK with this,” Kelly deadpanned when asked if he enjoys being an in-demand campaigner.

“I do enjoy getting out there. And meeting folks and helping my colleagues. I enjoy that part of it. But you know, it’s also time that I’m giving up with my grandkid.”

Democrats will need all the help they can get: They may have to run the table on their incumbents to keep the majority after Joe Manchin’s retirement.

Kelly is a disciplined campaigner, quick on his feet with few gaffes. His campaign strategy involved raising a lot of money and defining himself — and sometimes his opponents — before they know what hit them. He also found strategic ways to break with President Joe Biden.

After those tough races, he’s currently one of the better-known Senate Democrats. His biography as an astronaut, veteran and gun safety advocate married to former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) is an asset as well.

So it’s a reasonable question: Does he aspire to lead the DSCC, join leadership or maybe even look at national office? “My goal right now is to make sure we hold on to the Senate,” Kelly answered. “And that Joe Biden gets reelected. That’s what I’m working on.”

Kelly’s political formula has been successful in Arizona, though it will be hard to replicate this cycle.

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) has not announced her intentions on pursuing reelection. But if she runs, Sinema would find herself in a three-way race against 2022 GOP gubernatorial nominee Kari Lake and Democratic Rep. Ruben Gallego.

Kelly isn’t getting ahead of Sinema’s decision-making, but he’ll comfortably criticize Lake, who is backed by GOP leaders in Washington and unsuccessfully sought to overturn her 2022 election loss. He said that race won’t be easy but he believes his state does not “want the chaos politics.”

“Her race for governor and the aftermath, and what she has shown the people of Arizona of her character, and how she would govern? I just don’t see Arizonans electing her,” Kelly said. “We’re not a state that’s, I believe, going to be comfortable electing Kari Lake.”