Washington — On Friday, the House voted to approve a funding bill led by Republicans, ensuring government operations until November 21. This sets up tensions in the Senate, which will now contend with the GOP’s attempts to avert a potential government shutdown.
This short-term funding bill squeaked through the House with a vote tally of 217 to 212, featuring backing from one Democrat while two Republicans defected. Notably, Democrat Jared Golden from Maine supported the bill, while Republicans Thomas Massie from Kentucky and Victoria Spartz from Indiana opposed it.
The measure is likely to encounter significant obstacles in the Senate, where a 60-vote threshold is needed to advance any funding legislation. Given their 53-seat majority, Republicans will require the backing of at least seven Democrats to push the bill further. Currently, Senate Democrats seem largely united against the proposal, mainly due to claimed GOP refusal to discuss key Democratic issues, such as health care.
A Senate vote on the House bill is expected this Friday, alongside a separate proposal from Democrats. However, both measures seem unlikely to pass, leaving lawmakers uncertain on how to avoid a funding lapse at the month’s end, especially since both chambers are set to be in recess until September 29.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a Democrat from New York, voiced strong opposition before the vote, accusing the GOP of presenting a “partisan, reckless spending bill” that he believes is doomed in the Senate. He underscored the lack of dialogue regarding health care protections for American citizens.
Earlier in the week, GOP House leaders presented their bill, which aims to extend current expenditure levels for another seven weeks. The legislation proposes additional security funding following the tragic passing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, allocating $30 million for Congress and $58 million to fund executive and judicial branches. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson from Louisiana hinted that the House could introduce extra funding for security as a separate initiative next month.
In response, Democrats have crafted a counterproposal that aims to keep the government operational for a month while boosting security funds by over $320 million. However, their plan also calls for the permanent renewal of enhanced tax credits under the Affordable Care Act, reinstating cuts to Medicaid from President Trump’s previous budget, and the restoration of funding for public broadcasters that was withdrawn this year.
These measures are non-starters for Republicans, who argue that such provisions are ill-suited for a short-term funding package.
“This is what my colleagues on the opposite side insisted for — a straightforward bill. No partisan add-ons, no tricks. Just a simple proposition for a short term,” remarked Oklahoma Republican Rep. Tom Cole. “You received precisely what you requested.”
Even though Democrats frequently get behind efforts to maintain funding for the government, they’re currently under pressure to resist Republican strategies and the administration’s stance. During the last budget negotiation in March, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer allowed a Republican bill to advance, generating backlash from various party members. Many Democrats opined that permitting a government shutdown would have been a preferable outcome than conceding to GOP terms.
Schumer later commented, told Punchbowl News on Thursday that he believes the Republicans would bear the consequences if a shutdown occurs, asserting that Democrats have a solid position.
“I’m confident the American public will grasp that the Republicans are triggering another shutdown by not embracing bipartisan efforts and by bullishly resisting changes to health care under the influence of Trump,” said Schumer.
Democratic leaders are encouraging their Republican counterparts to engage in negotiations. However, Senate Majority Leader John Thune from South Dakota and Johnson signaled a disinterest in talks, arguing that Democrats consistently favor “clean” resolutions to maintain government funding.
“Chuck Schumer’s alternative proposal lacks seriousness,” Johnson remarked to reporters on Friday. “He understands these are non-negotiable terms… We took care to avoid any partisan items. There’re no hidden obstacles here.”
