The Senate approved a spending bill that was created hours before the closing deadline Friday evening, closing out President Trump's first fundraising battle for second term.
The law will fund the government through September 30th, increasing defense funds by $6 billion and imposing $13 billion in cuts on de-evacuation funds. Trump is expected to sign the measure because he previously supported it.
The political fallout on the measure is most resonating among Democrats, with Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer (DN.Y.) facing anger from many of his party over his decision to provide the votes he needs to pass through the Senate.
Here are five points.
Johnson succeeded in jamming Schumer
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) set the tone for this week's shutdown showdown, unveiling Saturday's stopgap, selling it to a meeting on Monday, and muscularizing it through a thin majority of his razors on Tuesday.
He then sent the House home, stuffed the Senate with bills, opposed Democrats to the action, shutting down the government or turning on the lights in Washington to swallow the law.
Ultimately, sufficient Democrat senators chose the latter at Schumer's request.
The passing of a stopgap in the House marked a major victory for Johnson and a feat he had never thought of before. With the help of Trump's lobbying campaign, the speaker was able to put his entire meeting (all but one member) on a stopgap despite his long reservations on a continuous solution among the conservative fiscal Hawks.
“I spoke with @potus today. Voting for CR is against all the bones of my body, but I have full confidence in the President's long-term commitment to sorting out my finances.” Social Platform x After voting.
And successful efforts pay dividends and give Johnson a platform that can pressure Senate Democrats to support the bill, warning that if they block it, they will be blamed for the shutdown.
“The house did the job and handed out a clean CR to fund the federal government,” said the speaker.I wrote it on xIt's ahead of the Senate vote. “If Senate Democrats block votes on this up or down, that's clear. They want to shut down the government. Period. Full stop.”
Confusion among Democrats
Since November, Democrats have struggled to find their way, trying to take the work from last year's disastrous elections, looking for a message and leader to fight the Trump administration.
That quest took another step back as chaos and conflict escalated during this week's fundraising battle.
For example, consider the top two Democrats on Capitol Hill. House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries (DN.Y.) voted against the spending bill, urging his caucus to do the same, and later launched a fierce campaign encouraging his Senate Democratic counterparts to follow the lawsuit. Meanwhile, Schumer ignored those calls, voted to move the stopgap forward, bringing nine colleagues along with him.
Tensions between the two Brooklynns spilled on public views on Friday when Jeffries refused to support his Senate counterparts and rejected questions about Schumer's leadership.
“Next question,” Jeffries told reporters.
But Democrats' rage is far wider than Schumer Jeffries' cracks, with many on the base. The main progressive, led by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (DN.Y.) – is lifting his arms above Schumer's decision to support the spending bill.
Schumer takes the arrow and draws progressive anger
Perhaps no one in Capitol Hill had a tough week than Schumer. He led a group of 10 colleagues to avoid the closure alongside Republicans, angering many Democrats and progress in the process.
The group, which is primarily made up of leadership members, looming retirees and battlefield state people, worked with Republicans to pass the bill.
Most other Democrats turned their anger towards Schumer.
“There's a deep sense of anger and betrayal,” Ocasio-Cortez told reporters late Thursday, referring to Schumer's decision. “And this isn't just progressive Democrats. It's all over the board – the whole party.”
Schumer will face upcoming questions about whether Senate Democrats can lead successfully against Trump. He may also need to think about the outlook for key challenges from Ocasio-Cortez in 2028.
For the first time in recent memory, a completely partisan funding bill has been passed
The government spending bill takes many shapes and sizes, from short-term continuation resolution (CRS) to large one-building omnibus to hybrid creatures that occupy the middle ground known as minibuses.
But in recent decades there has been a constant, constant surrounding all funding bills that have become law. It has always been created by leaders of both parties and approved with bipartisan support.
Until now.
The bill, approved by the Senate on Friday, was created by Johnson and House Republicans without any opinions from Democrats. And that included spending cuts of around $13 billion, which Democrats would never agree to in bipartisan talks.
Such a scenario has not been thought of in the past few years. For example, a partisan spending bill created by former speakers John Bourner (R-Ohio) or Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) may pass a GOP-led home, but there is no opportunity to avoid opposition from Senate Schumer Democrats. Former speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) faced a similar obstacle in the form of Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY.).
This week's breaking out of tradition has infuriated Democrats. Democrats called for a return to bipartisan talks, leaning towards Senate Democrats and using filibusters to block a one-sided GOP bill, bringing Republican leaders back to the negotiation table.
“When you are in the minority, you only have some real points that you can use the power you have – the procedural moves you have – do the right thing by people who are afraid of where this country is heading.”
“So, back to the negotiation table? Why is that some wild ideas? Let's go back together.”
Schumer refused to force GOP leaders to take that step by opposing the filibuster, which serves as the Democrats' single biggest leveraging tool. He feared that when Trump was in the White House, Republicans would instead close the country, perhaps slipping for the long term.
Americans never know if he is right, as the bill is going to become law. Equally unclear is whether the Republicans' successful, unilateral strategy guided us through a new era of partisan spending bills or another anomaly inherent in the Trump era.
Democrats fear slippery slopes by opposing the fight
Senate Democrats essentially decided by opposing the drawn-out battle between Trump and the GOP and offering a vote to move the measure into the room above.
Republicans were ready to blame them for the shutdown, deducing that the bill had passed the House and had a majority support in the Senate. The Democrat-led filibuster was the only one that would prevent the action from passing.
But Progressive has itched for the fight, claiming that Republicans have held all their power in Washington and were blamed for the closure. They also said Democrats are willing to continue consultations with Republicans who have banned them from negotiations on fundraising measures in support of the 30-day measure.
Some progressives said voters and Democrats would be angry that Democrats weren't fighting Trump.
“They want to hear Democrats willing to fight back. …We can't abandon opportunities. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said, “Our opportunities are very limited. We need to use each of them to the fullest.”
Sen. Tim Kane (D-Va.) pointed to provisions targeting District of Columbia fundraising, saying he partially explained the “no” vote.
“If it's $1 billion this time, why wouldn't we put $2 billion? [in] next time? And what are we going to say? $1 billion was fine, but is $2 billion too much?
“Normal issues, that always gets worse, right?” he continued. “You normalize something and then it gets worse.”
