Mike Johnson Faces Conservative Opposition to Trump’s Strategy for Government Shutdown Prevention
Speaker Mike Johnson’s plan to avoid a government shutdown is facing significant opposition from within his own party. Johnson’s proposal, which includes a six-month continuing resolution (CR) paired with a Trump-backed bill requiring proof of citizenship to vote, has met resistance from several GOP lawmakers.
At least six Republican representatives have publicly said they will vote against the plan, which is more than enough to block it if all Democrats also vote no. The opposition is primarily concerned about the impact on defense funding and the national debt.
This situation puts Johnson in a difficult position, as he needs to balance the demands of conservative members with the practical need to avoid a shutdown.
What's the overview?
The U.S. government operates on a fiscal year that ends on September 30th. If Congress doesn’t pass a budget or a continuing resolution (CR) to extend funding, the government can shut down, meaning many federal services and operations would halt.
Speaker Mike Johnson proposed a plan to avoid this shutdown by passing a CR that would keep the government funded for six more months. However, he paired this with a controversial bill requiring proof of citizenship to vote, which has caused division within his own party.
Some Republicans are concerned that the CR doesn’t address long-term fiscal issues and defense funding adequately. This internal opposition, combined with expected Democratic resistance, makes it difficult for Johnson’s plan to pass.
Impacts on federal employees.
Many federal employees are furloughed, meaning they are temporarily laid off without pay. Even those who continue to work (excepted employees) do not receive their paychecks until the shutdown ends.
The delay in pay can lead to financial difficulties for employees, such as missed mortgage payments, inability to pay for child care, and even food insecurity. During the 2018-2019 shutdown, many federal workers had to rely on food banks.
Shutdowns cause administrative disorder, leading to overwhelming workloads, missed deadlines, and fall off customer service. Projects may be abandoned, and overall productivity can suffer.
The reduction in hours worked by federal employees during a shutdown can decrease real GDP, even though they receive back pay once the shutdown ends. The uncertainty and financial strain can lead to increased stress and lower morale among federal employees.
Shutdowns not only affect the employees directly but also have broader economic and social implications.
Politicians often use the threat of a government shutdown as leverage in negotiations.
Pressure Tactic: A shutdown can create significant public and political pressure. The disruption of services and the financial impact on federal employees and the economy can force opposing parties to come to the negotiating table more quickly.
Highlighting Issues: By tying funding to specific demands, politicians can draw attention to particular issues they want to prioritize. For example, attaching controversial policies to funding bills can bring those issues to the forefront of public and legislative debate.
Power of the Purse: Congress has the constitutional authority to control government spending. Using this power to withhold funding can be a way to assert legislative priorities over the executive branch.
Political Messaging: Shutdowns can be used to signal commitment to a cause or to rally a political base. Politicians may use the threat of a shutdown to demonstrate their dedication to certain principles or policies, even if it means risking a temporary halt in government operations.
Negotiation Leverage: The closer the government gets to a shutdown, the more leverage politicians may feel they have to extract concessions from the other side. This brinkmanship can sometimes lead to last-minute deals that include significant policy changes.