Schumer and Jeffries Scramble to Avoid Blame as Government Shutdown Looms

As the September 30 deadline to fund the federal government draws closer, Democratic leaders in Congress are frantically trying to shape the narrative and avoid being held responsible for a potential government shutdown.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries are working behind closed doors to unify their party's messaging while accusing Republicans of engineering a crisis.

But Republican leaders, including Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, argue it is Democrats who are laying the groundwork for a shutdown while failing to engage in good-faith negotiations on critical funding bills.

At the center of the dispute is the annual appropriations process, the complicated legislative machinery that determines how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars.

With less than two months until the deadline, Congress faces the daunting task of passing all twelve appropriations bills necessary to keep the government fully operational.

Any failure to pass even a temporary continuing resolution would trigger a shutdown, forcing federal agencies to furlough workers, freeze services, and bring parts of the economy to a halt.

Despite early posturing from Democrats warning of Republican obstructionism, many on Capitol Hill are pointing to internal divisions within the Democratic caucus as a key factor in the mounting chaos.

On Tuesday night, Schumer and Jeffries convened a private strategy session with the top Democrats on the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. The meeting, held just steps away from the Senate chamber, was meant to iron out a unified approach to the funding negotiations. Yet, sources familiar with the meeting described the mood as tense and the messaging confused.

The urgency of the meeting was heightened by the fact that just days earlier, Senate Democrats appeared prepared to vote down the first appropriations bill brought to the floor—legislation to fund military construction and veterans’ programs—simply because Republicans had advanced it without including their input.

After briefly threatening obstruction, Democrats ultimately reversed course and voted to advance the bill, narrowly avoiding another intra-party embarrassment similar to the one in March, when Schumer and Jeffries were publicly at odds over whether to support a Republican-led continuing resolution.

Back then, Schumer initially signaled opposition, threatening to let the government shut down. But as pressure mounted, he folded and handed over the votes necessary to extend funding temporarily.

The political blowback was swift, particularly from progressive members who felt the Democratic leadership had squandered an opportunity to extract concessions. This time, Schumer is determined to avoid a repeat performance, but the path forward is anything but clear.

Publicly, Democrats are pointing the finger at Republicans, accusing them of railroading partisan bills through the process without consultation. “We all want to pursue a bipartisan, bicameral appropriations process,” Schumer said earlier this week.

“That’s how it’s always been done successfully, and we believe that. However, the Republicans are making it extremely difficult to do that.”

Jeffries echoed the sentiment, accusing House Republicans of moving toward a shutdown with a dangerous combination of political brinksmanship and hardline demands.

“House Republicans are, in fact, marching us toward a possible government shutdown that will hurt the American people,” he said, laying the groundwork to assign blame if negotiations collapse in the coming weeks.

Yet Republicans argue that the real obstructionists are Democrats who, for years, refused to consider appropriations bills passed by the GOP-controlled House.

They also note that when Schumer held the Senate majority last term, he refused to even bring many of the House GOP’s spending proposals to the floor for debate. That, they argue, created a backlog of unresolved funding issues that now threaten to paralyze Congress.

Speaker Mike Johnson was blunt in his criticism, accusing Democratic leaders of using procedural games to sabotage negotiations. “They’re gaming out how they can shut the government down,” Johnson told Bloomberg Government, flipping the shutdown narrative squarely back onto the Democrats.

Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader John Thune has taken a different approach. Since taking over earlier this year, Thune has vowed to return the Senate to “regular order,” a legislative ideal where each of the twelve appropriations bills is debated and passed individually. It’s a process that hasn’t been fully followed since the 1990s, when partisanship and gridlock started dominating Capitol Hill. “Frankly, I think a lot of us around here think this is long overdue,” Thune said.

But that ambition is already being tested. Democrats are furious over two recent legislative moves that they say violate the spirit of bipartisan cooperation. The first is what they derisively call President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill,” a massive spending package Republicans are pushing that includes cuts to climate programs, education grants, and social services.

The second is a $9 billion “clawback” package that seeks to reclaim unspent pandemic relief funds—another bill Democrats say was introduced without their consultation.

Thune defends both measures as fiscally responsible and necessary. He also accuses Democrats of threatening to stall the entire appropriations process over relatively minor disagreements.

“They’re using the rescissions package to shut down the appropriations process,” he said. “They’re the ones playing politics with the funding of government services.”

It’s worth noting that in the Senate, most bills require 60 votes to overcome the filibuster. This means bipartisan cooperation is not just ideal—it’s mandatory.

Democrats cannot move forward without some Republican support, and vice versa. That reality adds another layer of complexity to the negotiations and forces both parties to carefully calibrate their strategies.

Earlier this year, the House GOP did manage to pass a partisan continuing resolution to extend government funding temporarily. While Senate Democrats found the bill hard to swallow, they ultimately agreed to it to avoid a shutdown. This time, however, Democrats are demanding more say in the process.

The concern, according to sources familiar with internal Democratic discussions, is that another cave-in could damage party unity ahead of the 2026 midterms.

With President Trump seeking re-election and Republicans eyeing gains in both chambers, Democrats are under pressure to hold their ground and frame any potential shutdown as a result of Republican recklessness.

But that may be easier said than done. Already, conservative media outlets are blasting Schumer and Jeffries as desperate politicians trying to avoid blame for a crisis of their own making.

And within the Democratic caucus, fractures are beginning to emerge. Progressive lawmakers are wary of giving ground on budget cuts, while moderates fear the political consequences of a shutdown.

The White House, for its part, is watching closely but has yet to intervene publicly in the fray. President Trump has remained largely silent on the issue in recent days, though he is expected to weigh in once negotiations enter their final, high-stakes phase in September.

With less than two months remaining, both parties must now navigate a treacherous path. Democrats are determined to avoid another internal breakdown, while Republicans are eager to capitalize on Democratic disunity and push their agenda forward. Whether they can reach a compromise or barrel toward another shutdown will depend on what happens in the next several weeks.

In the meantime, Americans across the country are left to wonder whether the leaders in Washington can come together to do the most basic function of government: keep the lights on. If history is any guide, the final resolution won’t come until the last possible minute—and not without more political drama to come.