Shutdown deal highlights Democrats’ most consequential divide
In today’s edition … How is the House going to handle the shutdown? … You give us your reactions to the Senate’s shutdown deal … but first …
We want to hear from you
We’re here for you, and we want to make sure our newsletter is the best it can be. Give us your thoughts on the Early Brief in this survey. It should only take about five to seven minutes. Thank you!
Shutdown deal highlights Democrats’ most consequential divide
There are many divides within the Democratic Party: progressive versus moderate, urban versus rural, young versus old.
However, the deal some Senate Democrats struck late on Sunday to reopen the government highlights the most significant divide within the party at present. On one side are those who want the party to fight Republicans without exception; on the other are those who say that, as the party out of power, Democrats need to cuts deals to extract wins where they can.
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), one of the deal’s leading negotiators, argued the ongoing shutdown required the latter approach on MSNBC: “Standing up to Donald Trump didn’t work. It actually gave him more power,” he said.
Follow Trump’s second term
Those Democrats who want to fight no matter what disagree, and have made their anger clear since the deal was announced. As Amanda Litman, the co-founder of Run for Something, a progressive organization that recruits people to run for local office, put it, “People are pissed.”
Now, just a little under a week after sweeping victories brought the party together, Democrats are again openly debating how they should approach governance in the second Trump administration — and whether they have the right leadership in place.
The deal struck in the Senate funds the government through the end of January and protects federal workers. It includes a promise from Senate Republican leadership to hold a vote on extending expiring enhanced health care tax credits. But it does not extend the program; Democrats had demanded that extension in exchange for their votes to reopen the government. A pledge for a future vote was not enough for many in the party’s base, leading to outright revolt in response to the deal.
The emerging opposition has not aligned neatly with existing ideological lines: progressives and moderates have unified in their revulsion to the deal, for example.
The Democratic base’s anger “cuts across all of the other ways in which the party is battling with itself over what the future looks like,” Litman said. “For people who came up in politics prior to Trump … they have this understanding of the Republican Party the way that it was before. … That is not the Republican Party today.”
Litman’s organization enables individuals to sign up online to run for office and to receive assistance. She said Run for Something saw 1,600 people sign up to run after the Senate deal was announced late on Sunday, far higher than their recent daily average of 250-300 sign-ups.
“All factions of the party were unified around defending the Affordable Care Act,” said Jon Cowan, president of Third Way, a centrist political group. “This was a battle worth fighting, and it was worth fighting longer.”
These Democrats critical of the deal want to see more of a “ruthless pragmatism” in response to Trump and Republicans, as we recently explored with our colleagues Yasmeen Abutaleb and Patrick Marley.
The vitriol over the deal that’s been directed at Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-New York) clearly illustrates this desire.
Schumer voted against the agreement. He has attacked Republicans in speeches, saying on Monday, “Americans will remember Republican intransigence every time they make a sky-high payment on health insurance.”
But his critics argue that he should have found a way to stop the deal to reopen the government, and that he should step down from his leadership position.
“We need new leadership in the Senate,” said state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, who is running for Michigan’s open Senate seat and is opposed to Schumer as leader. McMorrow said Schumer’s leadership throughout the shutdown was “frustrating” and exemplified why Democrats need new leaders who “understand this is a very different moment.”
“It is not about where you are at in the party. It’s are you a fighter or are you a folder,” she said.
Schumer has faced calls to step down before, after the New York Democrat voted earlier this year to keep the government open without obtaining any concessions from Republicans.
Polling reflects the anger expressed by McMorrow and others. Seventy-one percent of Democrats said in an early November Economist-YouGov poll that the party should hold out for changes to health care funding before agreeing to end the government shutdown, while only 11 percent said they should not.
The senators behind the deal, and their supporters, argue that the shutdown had to end, because it was hurting many people nationwide. Fliers are dealing with cancellations and delays. Federal employees have gone weeks without pay. And millions of people have been left in limbo about their SNAP benefits.
Democrats who supported the agreement also said they did not believe Republicans would agree to Democratic demands. They also stress that the deal prohibits any federal layoffs until Jan. 30, undoes layoffs that have already happened and guarantees money to SNAP. That, they say, isn’t a fold, but a win that makes the best of a difficult situation.
“Waiting another week or another month wouldn’t deliver a better outcome,” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-New Hampshire), who helped negotiate the deal, said. “It would only mean more harm for families in New Hampshire and all across the country.”
Despite the attacks, some who back the deal say that the emerging schism is not as significant as it appears.
“We’re a big tent. We have different points of view. I have been doing this for 31 years,” Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Virginia), one of the senators who backed the deal, told MSNBC. “This is by far, by far, a minor league issue within the Democratic Party.”
Get ready with The Post
- Wall Street enjoying best run in years, but the ebullience spurs concern, from Andrew Ackerman.
- How this major city became one of America’s most affordable for homebuyers, from Julie Zauzmer Weil.
- Supreme Court won’t hear challenge to landmark gay marriage ruling, from Justin Jouvenal and Mark Berman.
- Trump pardons Giuliani, other allies who sought to overturn 2020 election, from Jeremy Roebuck.
- Syrian president meets with Trump in White House after unlikely ascent, from Kareem Fahim, Cleve R. Wootson Jr. and Susannah George
What we’re watching
The Senate has officially passed its package to reopen the government, kicking the matter over to the House. Expect some fireworks.
House Democrats are furious — furious! — at the deal in the Senate, saying it amounts to giving up on the party’s demand that Affordable Care Act subsidies be extended in exchange for Democratic votes to reopen the government. House Speaker Mike Johnson wouldn’t make a commitment to have a vote on ACA subsidies, casting doubt on the viability of the Senate deal (which promises a Senate vote on the subsidies).
“They’re going to have to explain themselves,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said yesterday of the Senate Democrats who voted with Republicans to reopen the government. House Democratic leadership has been whipping its members to vote against the package.
As long as he can keep his caucus together, Johnson won’t need Democratic help to pass the measure reopening the government. Members on the far right, who are usually hawkish about decreasing federal spending, signaled they would support the plan. And the president is on board.
Trump told reporters yesterday that the Senate deal was “very good” and that he planned to abide by its agreement to rehire mass-fired government workers.
Read more on last night’s vote in the Senate from Riley Beggin and Theodoric Meyer.
In your local paper
Minnesota Star Tribune: Another day, another string of dark reports from the nation’s airports, with cancellations impacting fliers nationwide, including the nation’s largest by scheduled departing passengers.
VTDigger (Vermont): Bernie Sanders walked so Zohran Mamdani could run. The Vermont publication delved into how Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign “laid the groundwork” for Mamdani’s win.
Bridge Michigan (Ypsilanti, Michigan): Battles over whether to build data centers are dividing communities. A planned facility is roiling farmers in Saline Township, a small community south of Ann Arbor.
From you
We asked for your thoughts on the Senate shutdown deal, and we got a record number of responses.
Many of you were irate at Senate Democrats for voting to reopen the government, using words like “ridiculous,” “cowards” and “self-centered.” Many of you felt Democrats caved and were naive to think Republicans would work in good faith to expand ACA tax credits, especially when several Republicans have overtly said they do not want to.
“I just keep imagining the Dems as Charlie Brown and the republicans as Lucy: Dems go to kick that football only to have the Republicans swipe it away at the last second,” Mary Ciriello wrote. “When will Charlie Brown ever learn that you just can’t trust Lucy?”
“The deal is a disgrace,” Roberta Jacobsmeadway wrote. “A promise of a vote in the future that everyone expects to fail is a farce at best.”
“If it was worth shutting down the government over health insurance subsidies then they were worth fighting for longer,” Paul Pieri wrote. “When you get into a pissing contest with a skunk you have to be willing to smell bad, and it seems that the Democrats got tired of the smell while Republicans are accustomed to the smell.”
But many of you were concerned about the shutdown going on for too long, especially as it was impacting SNAP recipients and federal workers going without pay. The Senate funding deal includes year-long funding for nutrition assistance programs, meaning families depending on the aid would still get benefits if there’s a future shutdown early next year.
“I think too many people are being terribly affected and the need for good healthcare won’t be advanced this way,” Sue Jollow wrote.
Corey Clinger supported ending the shutdown with a promise for an ACA subsidies vote. Clinger said extending the shutdown could swing public opinion; right now, polls have found Americans mostly blame Republicans for the shutdown. And if the credits are not extended, Clinger said Democrats “have a strong message for the mid terms.”
“Add to this Trump’s absurd position to go to the Supreme Court to not pay SNAP,” Clinger said. “The ads should [write] themselves.”
Send a reply
The Supreme Court will decide this year whether mail-in ballots can be received after Election Day, a matter that Trump has focused on in his efforts to challenge the 2020 election results. How do you vote? Do you rely on mail-in voting? And what do you think of the Supreme Court considering this question? Let us and your fellow Early Brief readers know at earl...@washpost.com.
Thanks for reading. You can follow Dan and Matthew on X: @merica and @matthewichoi.