Late Wednesday evening, November 12, the House of Representatives voted 222 to 209 to end the nation’s longest government shutdown. After just six Democrats joined the majority of Republicans (bar two notable exceptions), President Trump signed the legislation officially marking the resumption of federal businesses. But beyond dollars and cents, what has this 43-day hiatus cost the denizens of Congress politically?
Shutdown Particulars
The government will be funded through January 30, 2026, and it has reversed an estimated 4,000 layoffs that the Trump administration tried to push through. Additionally, three appropriation bills have passed along with it, which lay out the funds appropriated for SNAP programs until September next year.
The Democrats who voted with the majority include Representatives Jared Golden of Maine, Henry Cuellar of Texas, California’s Adam Gray, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, Tom Suozzi of New York, and Don Davis of North Carolina. Voting against their party line were Republicans Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Greg Steube of Florida.
“We feel very relieved tonight. The Democrat shutdown is finally over,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said after the vote. “All this was utterly pointless and foolish. This outcome was totally foreseeable. … They got nothing for their selfish political stunt.”
Speaking to Fox News’ Sean Hannity later in the evening, Johnson sought to set the blame squarely on the Democrats' shoulders. He said:
"Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries are from New York. They needed to get political cover because the Marxists are taking over the Democratic Party, especially in their state.
"They were more afraid of political retribution from the radicals that now run the Democratic Party than they were afraid about taking the food out of the mouths of hungry families.”
It’s a damning indictment and one that the co-leaders of the Democratic Party may find hard to shake off.
A Complicit Compromise
Senate Democrats managed to get a promise from Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) on an issue of their choosing by mid-December; rumbles in Congress indicate it will be about extending the COVID-era subsidies for the Affordable Care Act. However, despite how small such a bargain might seem on the surface, it is, in reality, far more minuscule. After all, House Speaker Mike Johnson has agreed to no such arrangement.
“Am I going to guarantee a vote on ACA, unreformed, covid-era subsidies that is just a boondoggle to insurance companies and robs the taxpayer?” Johnson pondered on Wednesday night. “We got a lot of work to do on that. The Republicans would demand a lot of reforms before anything like that was possible.”
Even if the Senate somehow votes in favor of whatever the eventual topic is, there’s no guarantee it gets a fair hearing in the lower chamber. And because it most likely entails a vote for Obamacare subsidies, the odds of it passing in the upper chamber are slim to none. What it will do is put Republicans on record as opposing it – as if the electorate wasn't already aware of that.
Whistling in the Wind
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) spearheaded an effort to obtain three years’ worth of ACA subsidies through a discharge petition – essentially bypassing the committee process. On Wednesday evening, he took to the floor of the House, insisting that his colleagues would only accept a three-year extension. Bizarrely, Mr. Jeffries is under the impression that he is in the catbird seat on this – after all, it would take 218 votes to pass, and Republicans have a 219 to 214 advantage.
Why he is holding the line on a three-year extension when the GOP is not even interested in extending the subsidies for one year is a mystery. “At this point, it’s entirely on them [Republicans] when tens of millions of Americans face dramatically increased health care premiums,” Jeffries said.
If this play was an attempt to salvage the loss of political capital over the 43-day shutdown, it is fairly weak sauce. Republican Study Committee Chairman August Pfluger of Texas summarized the position well, saying, "[Democrats] literally got absolutely nothing except for a total and complete surrender, that accomplished nothing more than hurting American families."
