A Government Shutdown Looms. Prepare For Democrats to Disappoint

It’s Government Shutdown Anxiety Season—again.

The end of the federal fiscal year is September 30, which means Congress must pass and the President must sign appropriations legislation by that date to fund government operations in the next fiscal year, or else suffer a government shutdown.  

Under the current rules, with Senate Republicans seven votes short of a filibuster-proof supermajority, bipartisan agreement is needed. Yet again, with about three weeks until the deadline, Congress is nowhere near an agreement. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer began the week with a letter to his colleagues framing the Democratic approach to negotiations: 

The only way to avoid a shutdown is to work in a bipartisan way, with a bill that can get both Republican and Democratic votes in the Senate. However, as we near the funding deadline, Republicans are once again threatening to go-at-it-alone—heading our country towards a shutdown and making the health care crisis even worse. With the Trump Administration’s attempt of the so-called “pocket rescission,” it is clear that Republicans are prioritizing chaos over governing, partisanship over partnership, and their own power over the American people.  

Senate Democrats have shown firsthand that we are willing to work in a bipartisan way to keep our government open by advancing bipartisan appropriations bills. However, the Trump administration is waging an all-out war against Congress’ Article I authority and the constitutional balance of power. Senate Republicans must decide: stand up for the legislative branch or enable Trump’s slide toward authoritarianism.  

This is political gobbledygook.  

Yes, Donald Trump is unconstitutionally trampling Congress’s authority with a pocket rescission—unilaterally clawing back $5 billion in congressionally approved foreign aid. This further negates the bipartisan work Congress did for the current fiscal year’s appropriations, previously undermined in July by Republicans passing a recissions package on a partisan vote. That smashed any vestiges of trust, but at least it was legal.  

Schumer rightly criticizes “Republicans [who] are prioritizing chaos over governing [and] partisanship over partnership,” and Trump specifically for “waging an all-out war against Congress’ Article I authority.” But then why tout how Democrats are “advancing bipartisan appropriations bills” while telling Republicans they should “stand up for the legislative branch or enable Trump’s slide toward authoritarianism.” Participating in bipartisan agreements that you know are being negotiated in bad faith is also a form of enabling.  

What Democrats should do, as I outlined in the Washington Monthly in July:

Immediately announce that all talks about Fiscal Year 2026 appropriations are over. Democrats, even in the congressional minority, are willing to share the responsibility of governing for the common good. But they cannot exercise joint responsibility if Republicans not only won’t keep bipartisan agreements but are openly dismissive of them.

Schumer is not crossing that Rubicon. Nor did he clarify what is needed to restore legitimacy to the appropriations process. Republicans, he said, should “stand up for the legislative branch.” But what does that really mean? Schumer could demand specific legislative language banning rescissions. Instead, he left the Democratic demand vague.   

If blurring the red lines sounds familiar, it’s because that was Schumer’s approach in March, the last time the federal government was hurtling toward a shutdown. He complained about Republicans drafting a bill “without any input” from Democrats, but didn’t insist on any particular provision. Lacking a clear demand allowed Schumer to acquiesce to Republicans and keep the government open without violating a specific pledge, even if it meant disappointing Democrats who wanted maximal opposition.  

I was one of the disappointed, but at the time, I acknowledged that Schumer’s political logic wasn’t terrible. Filibustering the Republican bill and precipitating a shutdown could have abetted Trump’s decimation of the federal civil service. And Republican unity around their bill, which hadn’t coalesced until late in the process, left Democrats vulnerable to being scapegoated for any shutdown. 

The Schumer strategy, both then and now, is to buy time. Instead of taking a definitive stand, he waits to see if squabbling Republicans can get their act together. Meanwhile, Democrats have plenty of room to maneuver.  

But I find the argument for hanging back even less compelling now than in March. Since then, Congressional Republicans have broken faith with their recissions. And Trump’s budget director has declared, “The appropriations process has to be less bipartisan.” In July, I argued the Democratic response should be “You want a partisan appropriations process? You got it,” and end all negotiations. That does not mean Democrats should root for a shutdown. They should make clear that Republicans wanted a partisan process, and it’s their responsibility to keep the government open. If that means changing the rules about filibusters, Republicans can figure that out.  

Moreover, Republicans are unlikely to splinter even if the bill doesn’t cut as much as they would like since they are prepared to do recissions. They can cut a deal with Democrats today to avoid a shutdown, then white-out the ink and cut more where they please. Why should Democrats play along? 

I grant that it’s easy for us pundit-analysts to propose grandiose, declarative tactics, and it’s natural for politicians to avoid painting themselves in a corner. Considering the lengths Republicans have gone to steamroll the Constitution, in this instance, I think the case for audacity over caution holds more weight than in normal times. Yet Schumer’s September opening suggests I should expect to be disappointed again. 

Yet I am also prepared to put any such disappointment in perspective. The Democratic minority’s indirect enabling of Trump’s slash-and-burn agenda in this one tricky area—keeping the government open—is not equivalent to the lickspittle Republicans doing Trump’s bidding at every turn.  

Maybe Schumer will surprise me. He has time to change, draw red lines, and put the onus on the GOP to keep the government open. But I’m not going to hold my breath. 

The post A Government Shutdown Looms. Prepare For Democrats to Disappoint appeared first on Washington Monthly.