Well, the cat is out of the bag on one of the Democrats’ talking points about the border wall.

And it was a Democrat who spilled the beans on their hypocrisy.

The government shutdown over the border wall funding battle has seen a number of excuses from Democrats. One, however, has been cost for the wall. When Kentucky’s Democratic Rep. John Yarmuth appeared on The Hill’s “Rising” on Friday, he admitted the amount requested is chump change compared to other amounts the Democrats have been willing to pay for border security.

Dem Rep struggles to explain Democrat opposition to a wall, admits it would help border securityhttps://t.co/yqBe8jZJwq pic.twitter.com/z4Tuy5kUgz — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) January 4, 2019

TRENDING: Fred Weinberg: Trump Just Shoved a Hockey Stick Down Dem Gov. Sisolak's Throat

Oopsie! Since he seemed to fumble his way through the interview, can we trust what he said about that? Yes, we can!

The Daily Wire reported that there has been more than one time in the past when the Democrats approved higher amounts of funding for border security.

In 2006 that amount was $50 billion over a period of 25 years. It was approved by 26 Senate Democrats.

The Boston Globe reported that the funds were to cover a secure barrier along the southern border. Then-Sens. Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Barack Obama all voted for the the Secure Fence Act of 2006.

Do you believe the Democrats are playing partisan politics about the wall funding? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 99% (1000 Votes) 1% (14 Votes)

The Globe goes on to note that Obama praised the bill at the time, saying, “The bill before us will certainly do some good.”

He also spoke of how it would create “better fences and better security along our borders.”

The then-future president also praised the fact that it would “help stem some of the tide of illegal immigration in this country.” But that is not the only example of Democratic hypocrisy on border wall spending.

In 2013, all 54 Senate Democrats voted to approve $46 billion for border security. That funding included spending for 700 miles of fencing, wrote The Daily Wire.

An Associated Press report explained that the 700 miles of fencing included an additional 350 miles of new fencing. The funding was given in part to “ensure that 90 percent of would-be crossers are caught or turned back.”

RELATED: Kamala Harris Spotted Being Protected by Type of Gun She Wants Banned

That was then. Now, those same Democrats who were for border security are against it, because they don’t like President Donald Trump.

Meanwhile, the elected heads of border states who know the issue best, like Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, know how important border security is.

Governor Perry was right. That’s why Texas will continue to fund border security that adds law enforcement, National Guard, boats, planes, detection and deterrence devices and more. But under the Constitution only the federal government can build the wall. It’s up to Congress. pic.twitter.com/YdBwu29L1u — Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) January 5, 2019

Texas is currently spending almost a billion dollars every biennium to secure the border—far more than any other state. The federal government must step up and do its constitutional job to end open border policies. https://t.co/vkkqi8UwG8 — Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) December 30, 2018

Ducey told KTAR News in January 2017, before Trump was even sworn into office, that he supported a border wall provided the state’s business relationship with Mexico is not harmed.

So, border governors have weighed in affirmatively on the wall. The Democrats have previously funded much higher amounts that included border barriers.

What then is the problem, exactly?

Why are government employees’ jobs and paychecks being held hostage by the Democrats?

It certainly looks like nothing more than partisan politics at the expense of innocent Americans.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.