By Uche Onyebadi

THE primary outcome of the 9/11 attack in the U.S. by terrorists affiliated to al-Qaeda is the intensification of measures to keep Americans safe and secure. Since then, a number of security breaches have occurred, but the country has been relentlessly putting other measures in place to guarantee the safety of her citizens.

The call from people in charge of keeping America secure is that the task is something that should involve everyone, because when the terrorists strike, they do not discriminate in the choice of their targets.

With this level of security consciousness, it would stand to reason that the last place one would expect matters of internal security to be treated with undeserved levity is the U.S. Congress. But, that expectation stands on quicksand.

Last week, the undercurrent of politicking with the safety and security of the homeland blew out in the open when it emerged that some politicians in Congress treat the war against terrorism as a matter for political posturing and wrangling. The issue is that funding for the U.S. Homeland Security Department was at risk of running out, and the department being shut down.

This government department has about 240,000 employees who oversee the U.S. secret service, the coast guards, transportation security administration, customers and border protection and the federal emergency management agency. In other words, practically everything about protecting the homeland lies in the docket of the Homeland Security Department.

So, why would there be any debate about providing funds for this crucial organ of government? The simple answer to this complex issue is that it is about immigration. With their new majority in the U.S. Congress, Republicans want to use the funding of the Homeland Security Department as a bargaining chip to halt and possibly scrap everything President Obama has done to revamp the U.S. immigration policy.

The issue of immigration reforms has become quite intractable in America. Ironically, former President George W. Bush had made spirted attempts to reform immigration, but could not do much because of entrenched political mind-sets against immigration in Republican circles, heightened by zealots who believe that immigrants are no longer welcome in America. What they conveniently ignore or pretend not to realize is that their forefathers were themselves immigrants from all imaginable corners of the globe.

It was this atmosphere of impasse that emboldened President Obama to take unilateral actions, based on the powers of his office, to do something about immigration. According to the White House, the president’s comprehensive immigration policy would “provide undocumented immigrants with a legal way to earn citizenship. It requires that everyone play by the same rules, including passing a background check, and paying taxes and a penalty.”

But, the Republican immigration hawks are not impressed. Left to their design, America should deport all estimated eleven million undocumented immigrants in the country. The consequences and impracticality of such root-and-branch approach to immigration do not mean much to the zealots. However, what they failed to factor into their anti-immigration calculus was President Obama’s determination to push forward with his more humane immigration reforms.

Fortunately for the anti-immigration crusaders, a federal judge in Texas recently gave a ruling that temporarily blocked President Obama’s deferred deportation programme. This must have emboldened Republican Congressmen and women to provide their own arm-twisting on the issue by making Homeland Security funding contingent upon the president pulling back on his immigration reform. But Obama has vowed that his administration will be “as aggressive as we can” on appealing the court’s order.

Surprisingly, and sensing that defunding the Homeland Security Department will be a backlash on Republicans come presidential election time next year, Senate Majority leader Senator Mitch McConnell last week wisely decoupled both matters and brought a clean Homeland Security funding bill to the Senate. It was passed. But, the House of Republicans remained obstinate.

They wanted a funding bill that will keep the department going for three weeks, a period that will give them opportunity to see if they can retool their strategy and gnaw away at the president’s immigration reforms. However, the Democrats saw through the façade and called for funding of just one week before the issue returns to Congress. That compromise passed just two hours to officially rendering the Homeland Security Department bankrupt last Friday as Congress passed a one-week funding bill and the president signed it into law.

It is still a puzzle why some Republican politicians would want to withhold funding for such an important department that protects Americans from all sorts of security threats from all manners of people and groups. Politicking with such important issue is not in the best interest of the country. The terrorists need just one successful attack and incident to show that they still pose a credible threat to America. Yet, some U.S. politicians want to defund the Homeland Security Department and provide the terrorists a good opportunity have a successful strike.