W
ASHINGTON — On Saturday, House Republicans introduced a spending bill aimed at funding federal agencies until September 30. This move signifies a solo approach that is likely to ignite a significant clash with Democrats regarding government spending priorities.
Spanning 99 pages, the bill proposes a modest increase in defense allocations while reducing nondefense funding below the levels set in the 2024 budget. This proposal is expected to face staunch opposition from most Democrats, who have consistently advocated for simultaneous increases in both defense and nondefense spending.
Congress has until midnight Friday to act to prevent a partial government shutdown.
Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is preparing to bring the bill to a vote on Tuesday, despite a lack of Democratic support, effectively challenging them to oppose it and risk a shutdown. He is counting on Republicans to pass the legislation largely without Democratic votes.
Historically, Republicans have needed to collaborate with Democrats to ensure the government remains operational. This has been necessary due to their frequent inability to secure enough votes on their own for spending legislation.
Importantly, this strategy has the endorsement of President Donald Trump, who has demonstrated the ability to maintain party discipline during his tenure.
Trump lauded the bill on X, urging Republicans to “stay UNITED — NO DISSENT — Fight for another day when the timing is right.”
“Great things are coming for America, and I am asking you all to give us a few months to get us through to September so we can continue to put the Country’s ‘financial house’ in order,” he stated.
The leadership staff of House Republicans detailed that the bill would allocate approximately $892.5 billion for defense and around $708 billion for nondefense spending. While defense funding sees a slight increase from the previous year, nondefense allocations are reported to be about $13 billion less.
Additionally, the bill does not include provisions for funding individual lawmakers’ community projects, often called earmarks.
It is important to note that the bill does not address most government spending, including mandatory programs like Social Security and Medicare, which operate on autopilot without regular congressional oversight.
Top Democrats in the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro and Washington Sen. Patty Murray, both criticized the proposed legislation.
“I strongly oppose this full-year continuing resolution,” remarked DeLauro.
Murray added that the bill would “empower Donald Trump and Elon Musk over federal spending — giving them the ability to choose winners and losers, which jeopardizes families in both blue and red states.”
Maine Sen. Susan Collins, chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, emphasized the need to focus on avoiding a shutdown, as such closures have far-reaching negative impacts on government operations.
“They require essential government employees, such as Border Patrol agents, military personnel, Coast Guard members, TSA screeners, and air traffic controllers, to work without certainty about when they will receive their next paycheck,” Collins stated. “We cannot let that happen.”
Trump’s call for party unity seems to be resonating. Some conservatives who traditionally oppose continuing resolutions are now expressing support for this approach.
Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., who has never backed a continuing resolution, is now in favor of Johnson’s initiative. He expresses confidence in Trump and the Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, to positively influence the nation’s fiscal situation.
“I’m not a fan of CRs,” Norman stated, “but what’s the alternative? Negotiate with Democrats? No way.”
“Freezing spending for six months to identify more cuts? Someone convince me that isn’t a victory in Washington,” added Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, another lawmaker who has frequently opposed spending bills but supports the six-month continuing resolution.
Republicans are hopeful that resolving this year’s spending will enable them to focus entirely on extending the individual tax cuts enacted during Trump’s first term and raising the debt ceiling to avert a potential federal default.
Democratic leaders caution that proceeding without their input raises the likelihood of a shutdown. A major concern is the leeway the legislation would afford the Trump administration regarding spending decisions.
Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate have underscored that since Republicans hold the majority, they bear the responsibility for funding the government. However, they have been cautious about disclosing how their members might vote on a continuing resolution.
“We need to see what their plan entails,” remarked Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York. “We’ve always believed that a bipartisan solution is the only viable resolution.”
House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York indicated earlier this week that the Democratic caucus would convene to discuss the legislation at the “appropriate time.” However, he adopted a firmer stance on Friday.
Jeffries expressed that Democrats are prepared to negotiate a “meaningful, bipartisan spending agreement that prioritizes working families.” However, he cautioned that the “partisan continuing resolution” could jeopardize critical funding for programs like veterans’ benefits and nutritional assistance for low-income families.
“That is simply unacceptable,” Jeffries asserted.
Trump has been engaging with House Republicans to secure their support for the legislation. With Republicans holding a slim 218-214 majority in the House, they can afford only one defection if Democrats unite against the bill. The situation becomes even more challenging in the Senate, where at least seven Democrats would need to cross party lines to overcome a filibuster, assuming all 53 Republicans vote in favor.
