It’s been done for years. At the end of the fiscal year, congressional leaders from the two main parties are pointing fingers at each other, threatening a government shutdown.
The posture-taking, however, has begun at an unprecedented hour this year.
With almost two months remaining in the fiscal year, the accusations are flying and the prospect of a shutdown is more real than normal. This is because the Republican-controlled Congress is determined to implement its policy goals, even when the opposite party does not agree with them.
In a recent closed-door meeting, top Democrats from both houses of Congress and the two committees charged with writing budget bills mapped out their next moves. Leaders have surfaced, urging Republicans to collaborate with them but being cautious not to lay out specific consequences for Republicans who refuse.
We fully support a bill that is bipartisan and passed by both houses of Congress. According to Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, that’s the standard practice. “The Republicans should lend us a hand in making that happen.”
Lawmakers on the Republican side have said that Democrats are eager for a government shutdown. John Thune, the majority leader of the Senate, stated that Schumer had threatened a government shutdown if Republicans were to approve a measure cutting $9 billion from public television and international assistance programs. Later on, the cuts were approved by Republicans.
Thune expressed his belief that the Democratic leader’s July ‘Dear Colleague’ letter did not reflect the opinions of all Senate Democrats, despite the fact that it was troubling to read an underlying threat to shut down the government.
The current status of legislative support for
With over $1.7 trillion allocated for both military and non-military operations, the federal government is running on a full-year continuing resolution. August 30 is the last day of financing.
The incoming Republican president asked for a similar amount for the upcoming fiscal year, but he suggested redistributing the funds substantially, putting more into military and border security and far less into healthcare, schools, housing, and foreign aid.
The House has only passed two of the twelve yearly budget measures thus far. Although no legislation has yet been approved by the Senate, the ones that have made it beyond the Senate Appropriations Committee have widespread support from both parties. In contrast, House proposals sometimes pass committees by a single vote.
The Senate is likely to take up one of the more easily passed spending items this week—the appropriations bill—to finance military building projects and the Department of Veterans Affairs. The bundle could get augmented by one or two more.
The financing procedure was delayed by Congress. The Republican Party gave Trump’s budget and tax reform plan top priority. To avert a shutdown and give legislators more time to work on the full-year budget legislation, most lawmakers think that Congress has to adopt a stop-gap package by Sept. 30.
Democrats’ point of view
The spending measure for this year, which runs out in two months, was vehemently opposed by Democrats. A federal shutdown, however, was ultimately deemed far worse by Schumer and nine of his Democratic colleagues. By doing so, they cleared the way for the measure to continue and eventually pass despite the filibuster, empowering Republicans to vote alone to support it.
For his tactics, Schumer received a lot of criticism from leftists. Republican leadership in the House released a statement declaring, “House Democrats will not be complicit.” Even among his own caucus, there were open voices of disapproval.
“If we pass this continuing resolution for the next half year, we will own what the president does,” said Adam Schiff, a Democrat from California. “I refuse to accept responsibility for that.”
Protests were planned by certain liberal groups at many events. Some of the events that Schumer had planned to promote her new book had to be rescheduled because of safety concerns.
In the subsequent months, Democratic dissatisfaction has only intensified.
To start, the Democrats have seen the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency stall or even prevent the disbursement of hundreds of billions of dollars. Then they stood by when Republicans reduced spending and taxes significantly, with no support from Democrats, and Trump signed the plan into law.
Lastly, they saw this month as Republicans took $9 billion in public broadcasting and international aid monies, which had been agreed upon by both parties before, and then revoked.
At the same time, Russ Vought, who is Trump’s head of the Office of Management and Budget, said that there “has to be less bipartisan” in the appropriations process.
Given that the 100-member Senate is unable to pass such political measures, Democrats argue that the majority of House activities have been fruitless.
“Since they can unilaterally rescission everything, why bother with appropriations now?” remarked Democratic Illinois Representative Mike Quigley. “I have never witnessed anything like the level of frustration that you are seeing.”
Republicans’ stance on ongoing deadlock
All of Washington’s power is held by Republicans. Blaming Democrats for a shutdown might become more difficult in light of that. However, in order to overcome a filibuster, any bill will ultimately require the backing of at least one Democratic senator.
The desire for a shutdown by Democrats is a cause for concern, according to Senator John Hoeven (R-N.D.). “… the Democrats perceive it as an opportunity to thwart the agenda we’re implementing.”
Republicans are adamant on holding votes on the twelve funding measures, according to John Barrasso, the Senate’s No. 2 ranking Republican. He claimed that in prior years, Schumer “had unilaterally shut down the appropriations process” by avoiding such votes and instead negotiating comprehensive spending packages with House GOP leadership and the Democratic administration of then-President Joe Biden.
“The Democrats will be the ones sabotaging the Senate and shutting down the government” if they withdraw from the process once more, according to Barrasso, “just to protect wasteful Washington spending.”