President Trump has been here before: in his first term, the United States went through the longest federal government shutdown in its history, 35 days between December 2018 and January 2019. Now, as the funding for the federal government is set to expire on 30 September, virtually everybody in America is expecting another shutdown.

However, there is a major difference between the 2018–2019 and the—most likely incoming—2025 lapse in federal government funding. By early January 2019, President Trump’s Republican Party did not have the majority in the House of Representatives. In fact, they were nowhere close to a majority, having only won 199 seats in the 2018 House elections. This time, on the other hand, the GOP holds the Presidency, the Senate, and the House as well.

Will the US be able to avoid a shutdown? The odds of that are minuscule. Back in March, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, at the threat of a primary from the progressive end of his party, all but promised a showdown after allowing a continuing resolution to pass. That CR bill extended government funding only until September—which is where we are right now.

Here, my issue is not primarily with Democrats in the Senate posturing over the shutdown. My bigger gripe is that they have the ability to do so.

If a party, Democrat or Republican, is able to win ‘the trifecta of power’, they should be able to pass annual federal budgets as long as they maintain that control. I do not think that giving a party the ability to hold the government hostage as long as they win 41 seats in the Senate is conducive to a well-functioning government.

‘I do not think that giving a party the ability to hold the government hostage as long as they win 41 seats in the Senate is conducive to a well-functioning government’

There is precedent for eliminating the 60-vote threshold to overcome the filibuster in the Senate already. In fact, the GOP has recently used both a reconciliation bill and a rescission bill to pass funding with a simple, 51-vote majority in the upper chamber of Congress. Former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat from Nevada, famously introduced the so-called ‘nuclear option’ in 2013, setting a 51-vote requirement for confirming presidential nominees as well.

Why not include appropriations bills for annual federal budgets in those 51-vote filibuster-proof exemptions as well?

The natural argument against that would be: what if the opposition gets into power, will they not be able to use it? My answer to that is: yes, as they should. If the Democrats were to win the Presidency, House, and Senate in 2028, I would not take solace in a minority GOP obstructing government funding.

That would be the case even if the Democrats were to use US taxpayer money to fund ‘woke’ operations around the world through USAID again. Given the 21st-century trend, the party holding the Presidency likely loses the House in the midterm elections—let the fighting start over the federal budget then.

That does not mean that I am against the Senate filibuster as a whole, however. Back in early 2022, I remember the Democrats trying to push through a sweeping federal elections bill to help them in that year’s midterms, at a time when they did not even have a clear majority in the Senate, having only 50 seats and the tie-breaking Vice Presidency. I was very happy at the time that some Democrat Senators were not willing to do away with the filibuster for the sake of achieving short-term goals.

If it is a piece of legislation that does not affect the day-to-day functioning of the federal government, rather one that changes or adds to the Federal Code and sets long-term policies, I am all for the filibuster. Even if it is a bill that I would otherwise support: for instance, I have no issue with the 60-vote threshold barring Republicans federally requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote or banning sex change treatment for minors. On the other hand, I would have been very irritated if President Trump had not gotten many of his nominees through the Senate because they did not have support from seven Democrats.

The issue of passing the federal budget for the year, in my opinion, is in the latter category of essential government operations.

Related articles: