In Montana Senate race, Tim Sheehy airs inaccurate illegal immigration attack on Jon Tester

Montana Republican Tim Sheehy is attacking his U.S. Senate race opponent, Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., over illegal immigration, echoing claims that other Republicans have used against incumbent Democrats this year.

A September ad that was jointly sponsored by Sheehy and the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the Senate Republicans’ campaign arm, includes a video clip of Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, saying, "Yeah, I am radical," then tries to tie Tester to her.

One position the ad says Tester shares with Harris is that "Jon Tester voted to give taxpayer-funded health care to illegal immigrants." (We previously rated the claim that Harris "endorsed free taxpayer-funded government health care for all illegal aliens" Mostly False.)

The ad’s claim refers to a vote Tester cast in 2013, but it exaggerates the vote’s effect.

Screenshot

Sheehy’s campaign confirmed that the ad’s assertion was based on the 2013 vote. 

On March 23, 2013, Tester voted to reject a budget bill amendment from then-Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., that would have established "a deficit-reduction reserve fund to achieve savings by prohibiting illegal immigrants or illegal immigrants granted legal status from qualifying for federally subsidized health care." The Republican amendment failed, mostly along party lines, 43-56.

The amendment was part of what is called a "vote-a-rama," a lengthy series of votes on amendments during the budget process. 

The Senate limits debate on budget measures to 50 hours but does not set a time limit for  considering amendments. Lawmakers from both parties often introduce amendments structured to force members of the other party to support or oppose policies that could be controversial with constituents.

Typically, "political messaging, not real policy change, is the immediate purpose," said Steven Smith, a Senate specialist and political science professor emeritus at Washington University in St. Louis.

Featured Fact-check

Instagram posts

stated on December 2, 2024 in an Instagram post

"President Trump has announced a plan to prosecute the Biden administration for the 325,000 kids that went ‘missing’ into human trafficking & sex slavery during their open border policies.”

In Sessions’ amendment, the "deficit-reduction reserve fund" nods to the requirement that amendments address the federal budget. But the amendment was aimed at getting Democrats to vote against barring immigrants in the U.S. illegally from participating in federally subsidized health programs.

Smith said the Sessions amendment would have had "no policy effect." Even if it had passed, the federal government already had laws preventing spending on health coverage, such as Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, for migrants in the U.S. illegally, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. 

Migrants in the U.S. illegally also cannot purchase subsidized health insurance coverage through the Affordable Care Act’s health insurance portal. (Some emergency services can trigger federal reimbursement to health care providers under a separate law, the Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act, but that does not constitute continuing health insurance coverage.)

"Other legislation would have to be enacted into law for (the amendment) to have any potential meaning," Smith told PolitiFact. 

During a budget "vote-a-rama," legislation could not be offered to change the underlying policy, because of how the chamber’s rules are structured.

An ad from Sheehy said Tester "voted to give taxpayer-funded health care to illegal immigrants."

In 2013, during a series of budget bill amendments, Tester and other Democrats voted against a Republican-sponsored amendment that would have prohibited immigrants illegally in the country from qualifying for federally subsidized health care.

But its passage would not have given "taxpayer-funded health care to illegal immigrants." Federal law already prohibited such spending and changing that would have required passing separate legislation.

We rate the statement False.

PolitiFact Staff Writer Seth Richardson contributed to this report.