Democrats weigh shutdown strategy as budget deadline looms

Senate Democrats are weighing a bold one-step strategy to shut down the government if they do not secure significant concessions on health care before funding runs out on Wednesday, according to multiple briefings and interviews with lawmakers and aides. The plan, which would require a minority party to vote for a spending bill with no changes, has been championed by some voters and party activists who argue a hard line could force negotiation and reshape the party’s public image. In March, after supporting a temporary funding bill, some members of the base pressed for Schumer to resign; MoveOn’s Katie Bethell framed the moment as a call for a more aggressive Democratic resistance, writing that “America’s ability to endure this moment requires a Democratic Party driving a vibrant, impactful and public resistance.”

Democrats say they would link any funding measure to an immediate extension of health care subsidies that expire at the end of the year, along with other policy demands, but Republicans control both the House and Senate and have shown little sign of backing a Democratic plan. The White House has indicated the administration could begin laying off federal workers if a shutdown proceeds, a consequence that would be borne largely by public services and employees. The broader question remains: how would the standoff end, and what would Democrats do next, given the political and procedural hurdles to a funding bill?

Publicly, Democrats say they believe Trump and Republicans would bear the blame if there is a shutdown and that they would eventually be forced to negotiate a compromise. That is a risky bet. Republicans hold the majority in both chambers and have shown no signs of relenting as Democrats insist on an immediate extension of health-care subsidies that expire Jan. 1, as well as other concessions. Democrats have also adopted a somewhat resigned view of the choice ahead. The country “will get worse with or without” a shutdown, Schumer said earlier this month, arguing that “Because Trump is lawless.”

The thorny question of endgame has marked a departure for Democrats, who in the past opposed shutdowns instigated by Republicans. An extended shutdown with mass layoffs would be a major escalation in the annual spending battles between the two parties. Still, the threat of closure and its political ramifications have generally compelled both sides to negotiate, at least temporarily. “Funding the government is a Democrat equity, at least it always has been,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., who has declined to negotiate with Democrats unless they help pass the House’s seven-week funding extension. “And here they are steering us off that cliff.”

The most recent shutdown—the nation’s longest—took place in the winter of 2018-19, when President Donald Trump insisted on federal dollars to fund a border wall. It ended after 35 days when the administration backed down. Democrats say Republicans have not reached out to negotiate, and they criticized Trump for canceling a White House meeting with Schumer and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York. It appears the president may have reversed course, as he planned to meet with Schumer, Jeffries, Thune and House Speaker Mike Johnson on Monday. “This president is just — he’s not up to being president if he can’t sit down and negotiate with the two Democratic leaders,” Schumer said in an interview on PBS’ News Hour.

Even as most Senate Democrats have held the caucus together in threatening a shutdown, some members have indicated flexibility or the possibility of striking a deal when the deadline arrives. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., voted with Republicans in a test vote, and nine other Democrats joined Schumer and Republicans on the March resolution. To pass a funding bill under a potential shutdown scenario, Republicans would need at least six more Democrats, and possibly more, to reach the 60-vote threshold required to advance legislation.

The internal dynamics within the Democratic caucus have drawn intense scrutiny from activists who helped propel the debate. MoveOn’s Payne cautioned that restoring trust with the party’s base will not happen in a single fight, but he said the leverage created by a shutdown threat could help push the party to take a harder stance. Sydney Register of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee echoed the sentiment, arguing that Democrats cannot afford to cede ground or “feed the schoolyard bully.”

On the presidential track, Cory Booker of New Jersey framed the fight as a principled stand: “I’m not afraid of (Trump), I’m not afraid of his threats, and I know that this is going to be a tough fight and an ugly fight,” Booker said earlier this month. “But this is one fight worth having, and that’s where I stand.” While some Republicans privately support extending health-care subsidies, Trump and GOP leaders have signaled that this is a matter to be debated later in the year. Party leaders say the time to act is now, even as the path to a resolution remains uncertain.

The looming showdown arrives as a reminder of how fragile the annual budget process can be and how quickly political calculations can shift when funding for the government is at stake. While the White House has signaled openness to talks, and a Monday meeting with top Democrats and Republican leaders looms, the outcome remains unclear. For Democrats, the question is whether the pressure of a possible shutdown can deliver a concession on health care and other demands without producing a political backlash that could damage the party in upcoming elections. For Republicans, the challenge is to defend a stance that resists immediate concessions while avoiding a prolonged funding crisis that could affect public services and the broader economy.