Careening Toward A Shutdown
A year-long Continuing Resolution or bust?
WSJ (“GOP Unveils Funding Plan Backed by Trump, Setting Up Clash With Democrats“):
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R., La.) on Saturday released a proposal endorsed by President Trump that would keep the federal government funded through September while cutting spending, setting up a showdown next week with Democrats.
The proposal would keep federal agencies funded until Sept. 30. It lowers the amount of nondefense discretionary spending by $13 billion from the 2024 funding level, while increasing the amount of money for defense spending by about $6 billion. It also boosts funding for border enforcement. The military funding is meant to win over defense hawks who have rejected past short-term measures that they said have underfunded the U.S. military.
House lawmakers are expected to vote on the proposal, termed a continuing resolution or CR, as early as Tuesday, with a majority needed to pass it. But even if House Republicans manage to pass the proposal, it will need at least 60 votes in the Senate, which only has 53 Republican lawmakers.
Funding for federal agencies runs out on Friday night. With no new legislation, many federal employees would be furloughed, while others would continue to report to work with no pay.
Representatives for House Republican leaders said Saturday that they worked closely with Trump in crafting the bill. That coordination could help them avoid an embarrassing scenario in which a large number of Republicans reject the proposal. Earlier this week, Johnson said that he has enough votes to pass the new measure in the House, despite a tight 218-214 split.
“The House and Senate have put together, under the circumstances, a very good funding bill,” said Trump on Truth Social on Saturday. “All Republicans should vote (Please!) YES next week,” he said, adding in capital letters, “no dissent.”
More than a dozen House Republicans have never voted to pass a temporary funding bill under Johnson’s leadership, thanks largely to unmet demands for more spending cuts, and he has been forced to rely heavily on Democratic votes to approve such measures in the past. But many of these GOP holdouts are expected to get on board this time, thanks to pressure from Trump and ambitions for passing a Republican bill pairing tax cuts and spending reductions later this year.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) said in recent days he opposed the GOP bill and didn’t think that Republicans would be able to come up with enough votes for it to pass. That sentiment is shared by other Democrats, angered by cuts to federal jobs and government programs being carried out by the Trump administration.
“I’m a NO vote. Republicans always vote against a CR. Since they claim they have a mandate, let’s see if they vote for it,” said Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D., Fla.) on X.
WaPo (“Republicans unveil another extension to try to avert government shutdown“):
With less than a week to go before a March 14 shutdown deadline, President Donald Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) are pushing a bill that would extend current funding levels until the end of the fiscal year in late September.
The measure unveiled Saturday, known as a continuing resolution, or CR, would stave off a politically costly shutdown if it passes.
But it would also mean that Republicans, who control both chambers of Congress and the White House, would largely keep funding set by President Joe Biden last year, rather than allow the appropriations committees to set new spending levels — hardly the win they were hoping for.
It is also not guaranteed to pass the narrowly divided House, where Republicans have a 218-214 majority and have had to rely on Democrats to pass previous funding measures to keep the government open. As it is, House Republicans can afford to lose only a single vote if all lawmakers are present.
[…]
By bypassing the yearly appropriations process, Congress would cede some of its power to dictate how money is spent — which is exercised through that process with more specificity — and give the Trump administration more leeway over federal spending. Democrats argue that a continuing resolution would make it easier for Elon Musk, who oversees the U.S. DOGE Service, to drastically slash the size of government because it continues current funding levels without as much specificity about how the money should be spent.
Republicans have raised concerns about some of Musk’s cuts, but they largely support his efforts to slash the federal government.
Government by continuing resolution is incredibly inefficient but likely the best case scenario under current circumstances. There are a handful of House Republicans who are wild-eyed deficit hawks and have thus never voted for a budget, since getting one passed inevitably involves compromises. And Democrats have absolutely no incentive to help the GOP out of a jam this time.
They bought it, when they break it we don’t want any Democratic fingerprints on it.
I think a shutdown is almost inevitable. The GOP, which control the House, Senate, POTUS and SCOTUS will blame it on the Dems. Half the country will believe them. The MSM will do its both sides thing. Meh. They supposedly have a mandate to govern so they ought to govern.
Steve
I’ma give Republicans the edge here. Ultimately, Democrats are not willing to destroy the nation in return for control over it and fear getting blamed for the coming recession. Republicans are willing to and believe (perhaps correctly) that they can duck the blame.
Game and set to GQP. (The match never ends.)
@steve:
Moreover, the 51% of the electorate that voted against the alternative deserve to get what they actively and tacitly supported. Win-win*.
*Yeah, I know, I have a weird notion of what winning is. Get over it.
So… We’re not going to keep supporting Ukraine with military aid and we won’t have to prop up NATO as much in the future… but we need to increase defense spending… For an invasion of Greenland or Toronto?
What happened to Hegseth/Trump cutting the defense budget 8% per year?
@gVOR10:
The administration is counting on the Supreme Court reversing precedent to allow the executive to impound funds rather than spending them.
@Argon:
My understanding is aid to Ukraine (or Israel, or Taiwan) is supplemental spending not included in DOD’s “normal” budget. I assume the big ticket spending associated with NATO is keeping 100,000 troops and all of the bases paid and running in Europe. Some of that would require increases to, for example, keep up with inflation in the cost of housing and food and electricity…
Can’t they pass it via reconciliation, with only 50 votes?
Anyway, there should be no Democratic votes until we can actually ensure the administration spends money as congress dictates.
@Gustopher: “Anyway, there should be no Democratic votes until we can actually ensure the administration spends money as congress dictates.”
This. Exactly this.
I’m now wondering what happens when those traditional “I won’t ever vote for a budget” types get muscled by Trump and Musk. What will they say? What will they do?
They’ve made saying “No” a lifetime habit and a campaign slogan. Will they back down? Will they talk about the kinds of persuasion used on them?
10 Democrats voted to censure Al Green this week, so I really don’t have my hopes up about opposition unity.
Is it? I think we might finally be in a situation where a shutdown is preferable. Trusk has been implementing the shutdown-of-a-thousand-stupidities already, unilaterally. What’s the point of passing a budget that the President can just ignore whenever he likes?
America (by which I mean MAGAstan) needs to learn that the federal government is important and useful, and start pressuring the people they voted for to stop breaking it. If they haven’t learned that already, maybe a shutdown is what they need. And none of this “essential personnel” nonsense — shut it all down for real and teach them some basic Civics. Yes, I know that will hurt the vulnerable — but those people are going to be hurt either way, at this point.
No Democratic votes unless any new tax cuts exclude households with an AGI over $400k, lower for single-person households. Although why anyone should trust Mike Johnson is beyond me, he seems almost as dishonest as Trump.
@Gustopher:
“Anyway, there should be no Democratic votes until we can actually ensure the administration spends money as congress dictates.”
100%. What is the point in passing laws if the President is just going to ignore them?