Congressional Democrats appear hell-bent on shutting down the government to prevent a short-term extension of spending levels originally set by a Democrat president.
Democrats’ gambit to force a shutdown would temporarily please a radical base that has caused increasing personal political peril for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY).
Yet with no apparent path out of a shutdown in which Democrats secure meaningful wins, and with the shutdown presenting the Trump White House the authority to enact widespread cuts throughout the executive branch, the long-term benefits for the party are difficult to determine.
Any exit ramp for Democrats is likely to be bumpy. And whatever road it takes them down will lead to an even more empowered and emboldened Trump White House.
Jeffries, Schumer, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD), and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) are scheduled to meet with President Donald Trump at the White House in a meeting requested by Schumer. But few expect any progress from the meeting.
Republicans, who hold the White House and both chambers of Congress, appear determined to stick with their chosen path forward.
The House passed a clean continuing resolution (CR) September 19 to continue current spending levels until November 21. Those spending levels were originally passed during Joe Biden’s presidency and were extended through the end of the current fiscal year, September 30, 2025, in a CR in March.
Just hours later, the House-passed clean CR failed in the Senate. Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) was the only Democrat who voted for the CR. Republican Sens. Rand Paul (KY) and Lisa Murkowski (AK) opposed the deal.
Thune plans to bring that bill back up for a vote Tuesday, giving Democrats one more chance to keep the government’s doors open.
Schumer and his minions are unlikely to have second thoughts.
Democrats, in messaging against the bill, are leaning heavily on health care, a rare issue they see as providing them an opportunity in the 2026 midterm elections. They’ve often used the term “Republican healthcare crisis” in arguing against the short-term spending bill, which includes no new provisions affecting healthcare.
Most notably, Democrats want to use the seven-week bill to extend Obamacare subsidies that do not expire until the end of 2025. (Republicans argue a short-term bill is an inappropriate vehicle to attach such a consequential rider that deserves its own thorough debate). Democrats have also advocated for using the short-term bill to undo provisions passed by Trump’s big beautiful bill to protect Medicaid, including removing illegal aliens from welfare rolls.
Republicans in the majority are unlikely to undo their signature legislative achievements.
A shutdown seems almost assured. Jeffries told Punchbowl News days before the shutdown that Democrat leaders “have been preparing for a government shutdown showdown for months.”
In a last-minute Monday morning press conference, Jeffries insisted Democrats are looking for a bipartisan path forward, but called Republicans’ plan to continue Biden-era spending levels a “partisan spending bill.”
“If the government shuts down, its because Republicans want to shut the government down,” he said.
Despite those confusing characterizations, the clean CR is the most bipartisan option available for Democrats as it presents a path for substantive bipartisan negotiations.
That bill allows seven weeks for the continuation of bipartisan talks begun months ago between Democrats and big-spending Republican appropriators (who generally are more amenable to partnering with Democrats). That process to negotiate a longer-term spending bill would provide a vehicle for Democrats to attach some of their priorities – although, as the minority party without control of the White House or Congress, their leverage is limited.
Elections, of course, have consequences.
But by nuking those ongoing bipartisan negotiations with a shutdown, Democrats are increasing the chances Republicans simply continue current spending levels even further, perhaps to the end of the next fiscal year – a distant September 30, 2026, right before midterm elections.
A shutdown is bad enough for Democrats, but killing the bipartisan negotiations on a longer-term spending deal is more disastrous.
The Office of Management and Budget, led by Director Russ Vought, perhaps the most notorious opponent of the federal bureaucracy, issued a memo days before the funding deadline that said agencies should consider a “reduction in force” for many federal programs if the government closes — meaning thousands of federal workers could be permanently laid off.
Many of those shutdown layoffs of bureaucrats, who many Democrats see as their operatives within the federal government, would be permanent.
But a CR through the end of the next fiscal year would be an even greater nightmare for Democrats, further adding to confusion as to why the minority party is pursuing this course.
Spending cuts from OMB made through rescissions – the process that eliminated Democrats’ beloved funding for corporate broadcasting and foreign aid – remain in place as long as current funding levels continue. And Vought has made clear he intends to rescind even more spending.
It gives little incentive for Republicans to capitulate, and creates more questions as to why Democrats are insisting upon a shutdown.
Although Republicans have lost the messaging battle in prior shutdowns, this time the GOP possesses advantages it has not previously held. For once, the party is united around an easily understood, clearly defined agenda item in the clean CR. And by blocking that reasonable proposal, it’s now the Democrats holding the government hostage by making demands to radically change current spending and policies or else trigger a shutdown.
Schumer and Jeffries are unpopular with their base, a fact that might drive their decision-making.
Radical leftist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) would be a favorite to defeat Schumer in a primary, if she chose to do so.
And Marxist Zohran Mamdani, the overwhelming favorite to win the New York City mayoralty in Schumer and Jeffries’ state, has created further headaches, particularly for Jeffries.
The House minority leader has tried to keep a safe distance from Mamdani, whose growing position as the leader of the national Democrat Party threatens Jeffries’ chances of ever gaining the Speaker’s gavel. But his refusal to thus far endorse Mamdani, who won their party’s primary for New York City mayor, has caused a groundswell of attacks against Jeffries.
In forcing a shutdown, desperate Democrats may be hoping the short-term reprieve from incessant attacks from their radical base is worth the long-term headaches and reduced political standing.
Somewhere, Trump is smiling.
Bradley Jaye is Deputy Political Editor for Breitbart News. Follow him on X/Twitter and Instagram @BradleyAJaye.
Read the full article here