The halls of Congress witnessed an uncommon sight this week when a Democratic senator stood before cameras and called his own party’s immigration stance what many Americans have been thinking all along: stupid.
Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania pulled no punches during his appearance on a Tuesday broadcast, delivering a message that runs counter to the progressive wing of his party. The freshman senator made clear he stands firmly against the “Abolish ICE” movement that has gained traction among left-leaning activists and lawmakers in recent years.
“I’m one of the rare Democrats saying do not abolish ICE,” Fetterman stated plainly. “That’s just stupid, that’s outrageous to think those kinds of things.”
The Pennsylvania Democrat’s candor comes amid ongoing debates over Department of Homeland Security funding, though Fetterman revealed what many suspected: the current fight carries more theatrical weight than practical impact. According to the senator, Immigration and Customs Enforcement already possesses its full funding allocation, rendering the current congressional showdown largely symbolic in nature.
“ICE already has all of their money,” Fetterman explained, acknowledging a point raised by his colleague from Kentucky. “So that vote is really largely symbolic, because it’s not going to defund.”
This admission raises questions about the ongoing political theater surrounding immigration enforcement. If the money has already been allocated and disbursed, what exactly are lawmakers fighting over? The answer appears to be positioning and messaging rather than substantive policy change.
Fetterman’s straight talk extended to the broader funding debate engulfing Capitol Hill. The senator warned that separating DHS funding from other appropriations bills could fundamentally alter the political landscape and potentially trigger a government shutdown.
“If that doesn’t happen, that would almost guarantee that we will shut our government down,” he cautioned. The senator made clear he would not support such an outcome, citing the impact on military pay and other essential government functions.
“I would find myself unwilling to not pay our military and damage other parts of our government,” Fetterman said, “especially to remind people that it’s not going to change the situation with ICE at this point.”
The senator’s position represents a growing fissure within Democratic ranks. While progressive firebrands continue pushing for the elimination of federal immigration enforcement agencies, moderate Democrats from competitive districts and swing states find themselves caught between party activists and constituents who support border security.
Fetterman’s willingness to publicly challenge the “Abolish ICE” movement demonstrates either political courage or calculated positioning, depending on one’s perspective. Pennsylvania remains a crucial battleground state where immigration enforcement maintains significant support among working-class voters who helped elect the senator.
The timing of these remarks proves noteworthy as well. With appropriations deadlines looming and partisan tensions running high, Fetterman’s acknowledgment that the funding fight carries minimal practical consequence exposes the performative nature of much congressional activity.
Whether Fetterman’s candor represents a genuine shift in Democratic thinking or simply one senator’s attempt to maintain credibility with his constituents remains to be seen. What stands clear is that at least one Democrat has decided that calling out his party’s more extreme positions carries less political risk than remaining silent.
Related: Liberal Protest Group Plans Third National Demonstration Against Trump Administration
