Chuck Schumer Did the Right Thing

Photo by Clay Banks on Unsplash

Back in May 2007, after a lengthy standoff with the Bush administration, the new Democratic Congress ultimately passed a bill funding the Iraq war for a few more months that did not include a timeline for the withdrawal of American troops. Democrats were denounced as sellouts by many anti-war activists and bloggers—even by some leading Democratic presidential candidates, such as John Edwards. Since you have likely long forgotten about this fight, you can read an 18 year-old Politico article on it here.

In 2018, Senate Democrats briefly shut down the government then reversed course over the expiration of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA. Democrats were once again denounced as sellouts, this time by immigration advocates and left-wing Twitter. Since you most likely forgot that this shutdown even happened, here is a seven year-old article about it from The Guardian that you can use as a refresher.

These are just two of the many examples that I’ve seen in my 21 years in politics of a critical mass of congressional Democrats joining with Republicans to end a high stakes game of brinkmanship . Every time it happens, Democrats are denounced as sellouts and traitors. However, in almost every case—even though I almost never said this publicly for fear of reprisals from my colleagues and peers—I have not shared that progressive loathing for Democrats when they refused to take a fight over the brink to a place where troops got hurt, agencies got defunded, or the entire government got shut down.

So it is again in the most recent fight over government funding. While I believe House Democrats were correct in demanding guardrails to prevent further mass firings, impoundment of funds, and dismantling of federal agencies during the negotiations over government funding these past several weeks, and while I also believe that House Democrats were correct to (almost) unanimously oppose the government funding bill that Republicans put together without any negotiations earlier in the week, ultimately a government shutdown was highly likely to exacerbate the very problems we are trying solve.

---

Let's think this through.

First, let's start with our goal: stopping the Trump administration’s illegal mass firings, impoundment of congressionally approved funds, and dismantling of federal agencies. This is a goal I believe Democrats of all persuasions agree on, and even if they would never say it right now, quite a few Republicans do too.

Second, let's consider our strategy. Again, I think there is universal agreement on this: oppose the firings through all legal means that would not backfire.

Third, we can move on to tactics. Let's consider our options:

1. Oppose the mass firings, impoundment of funds, and dismantling of federal agencies in court. Check. This is underway and being carried out at every possible turn, and quite a few are meeting with real success. For example, this week alone two judges ruled that the mass firing of tens of thousands of probationary federal employees was illegal, and that they must be rehired.

2. Make as much noise as you can about the firings, impoundment, and dismantling of federal agencies to build as much popular opposition to them as possible. Once again, check. I think Democrats of every persuasion agree on this. We may have honest differences about what these messages should be or how effectively they’re being communicated, but I do not think there is any question that Democrats need to be loud.

3. Demand guardrails to prevent the firings, impoundment, and dismantling of federal agencies in negotiations over government funding. Check. This is exactly what Democrats did, and once again this was universally agreed upon. However, it was universally opposed by congressional Republicans, who refused to stand up to Trump on this point.

4. Make Republicans pass their own funding bill through the House of Representatives without any help from Democrats. Check again. Since Republicans in Congress refused to put any limitations on the actions of the Executive Branch in the government funding bill negotiations, Democrats rightly dared them to pass a funding bill with only Republican votes. This is something that Republicans have consistently been unable to to do since they retook the House in 2023. It was a good bet they would once again fail and thus be forced to negotiate with Democrats as they have time and again these last two years. Unfortunately, the calculus changed when Donald Trump was able to convince the hard-right Freedom Caucus to go along with a six month continuing resolution to fund the government. Continuing resolutions are typically opposed by a large enough number of House Freedom Caucus members that Republican leaders have to turn to Democrats, and make concessions to them, in order to pass government funding bills. When the HFC fell in line behind Trump, Republicans were able to pass a six month continuing resolution funding the government through September 30 without needing any Democratic votes (one Democrat voted for it, but the bill would have passed even if that member, Rep. Jared Golden of Maine, had opposed it).

5. Use the 60-vote cloture rule in the Senate to shut down the government over the firings, impoundment, and dismantling of federal agencies. Once the government funding bill passed the House, the only remaining tactic available to Democrats was to use the 60-vote cloture rule in the Senate to block it. At that point, almost every federal agency would shut down, and the vast majority of remaining federal workers would be furloughed. Then, Democrats would take their case to the American people, arguing that they would not allow federal agencies to reopen, and federal workers to go back to work, until the dismantling of federal agencies and mass firing of federal workers stops.

Democrats only disagree on this fifth tactic. Everyone agrees that what the Trump administration is doing is wrong and needs to be stopped, but is shutting down the government in order to protest shutting down the government a good idea? Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ultimately answered “no” to that question. Yesterday, he joined with nine members of his caucus to not filibuster the funding bill passed by the House earlier the week, thus preventing a government shutdown.

---

While it may not be a popular position to take, the truth is I agree with Schumer on this one. The jig was up once the continuing resolution passed the House without needing Democratic votes, and this phase of the fight was over.

A shutdown would not have worked for the following five reasons:

1. Government shutdowns have a lengthy history at this point, but they have repeatedly failed to force one party or the other to make policy concessions. In other words, they have never worked before, so it isn't clear why one would work this time.

2. Government shutdowns are bad and cause lots of harm. Let's keep the other party as the one causing harm, not us.

3. As Matt wrote yesterday in his piece for paid subscribers, “Asymmetry: Republicans cannot be governing partners when they want to tear it all down,” shutting down the government with arsonists in charge of it is unlikely to bother the arsonists more than it will bother you. There is every reason to believe that Donald Trump and Elon Musk would welcome a Democratic-induced shutdown right now—making this one much, much worse than any previous shutdown.

4. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to say that you are shutting down the entire government and furloughing almost its entire workforce in order to protest a smaller portion of the government being shut down and smaller fraction of the workforce being fired. That isn’t a message that’s likely to persuade many swing or low propensity voters.

5. Only a filibuster could have shut down the government, and the filibuster is both undemocratic and difficult for the average person to understand and accept. As such, it is not a particularly good way to seize the high ground in any major public fight.

I completely understand that Democratic and progressive activists are angry right now about what the Trump administration is doing with mass firings, impoundment of funds, and dismantling agencies like USAID, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Department of Education and more. Honestly, even though I work hard to leave anger aside when I engage in politics, I have found not getting angry quite difficult at times over the last two months. Also, I entirely understand that quite a few people might get angry at me for writing this, and that's fine. I'm being honest here, and I’m at the age when I don't want to live any other way.

As was the case with the Iraq war funding fight in 2007, the DACA shutdown fight in 2018, and so, so many long-forgotten legislative battles like these, Democratic leadership was right to not instigate a trip over the brink. It is a bitter bill to swallow, but Chuck Schumer did the right thing.