Politics of a government shutdown over DHS funding

[bigtree]

...like most people I believe it's a no-brainer for Democrats to oppose giving more money to Homeland Security. I'd shut down the entire agency, and so would quite a few elected Democrats in Congress.

Problem is, republicans are intent on combining the DHS funding with a larger funding package that includes other priorities in defense, health, transportation, education and housing that many Democrats support.

WASHINGTON, Jan 26 (Reuters) - The federal government appeared headed for a partial government shutdown this week, with Republicans and Democrats at odds over funding for President Donald Trump's Department of Homeland Security after the fatal shooting of a second U.S. citizen by federal immigration officers in Minnesota.

Senate Democrats said they would not provide the votes needed to pass a $64.4 billion DHS bill and called on Republicans to strip the legislation from a larger package that would also fund programs in five other areas through September 30, including defense, health, transportation, education and housing. Current funding for those programs expires after midnight on Friday.

“Senate Democrats have made clear we are ready to quickly advance the five appropriations bills separately from the DHS funding bill," Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement. "If not, Republicans will again be responsible for another government shutdown.”

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/shutdown-looms-ice-shootings-spawn-partisan-fight-over-dhs-funding-us-congress-2026-01-26/

...like many people, I couldn't care less what the republicans pass and would send them home until we all vote again. The politics that many Democrats are challenged with in this fight, however, doesn't agree with my selective anarchism.

Although Democrats can now be expected to stand together in opposition to DHS funding, that solidarity becomes a question in a shutdown where Americans' paychecks and other needs are being interrupted.

As I often remind, movements and protests without a legislative goal at their head are a matter of volume, but, little effect. With that understanding, I think it's reasonable to expect that there will be an effort by some Democrats to negotiate changes to the DHS funding bill that makes demands about the agency and agents' conduct and mission.

I realize the ideal is to just let them rot, but I do think it's unrealistic to expect all of the Senators to be comfortable with an open-ended objection to DHS funding that means the government will stay closed indefinitely. I wish there weren't Senators and others with that view, but here we are, with at least 7 Democrats needed to push it through the Senate (with Fetterman a permanent vote on this).

I just wanted to relate this because, I get that some expect that republicans will be made to stop where they are (it's what I would want), but the reality is that getting correct and substantial concessions in the DHS bill appears to be the achievable fight here for anyone like me looking to see where this goes.

I don't see all Dems indefinitely blocking passage of the package IF they get meaningful changes to the DHS bill. FWIW. It's a legislative goal, and not the worst that they could do to make that progress in this minority.

[rampartd]

1. he doe not intend to use any of the money, except maybe dhs, for its intended purpose.

"starve the beast"

[bigtree]

2. agree

...I think they'll try to negotiate changes, instead, though.

We don't really know what the few who voted to let it ride for 2 months will do, but I guess we can imagine.

[rampartd]

3. any dem voting for this does not understand trump

or maybe they are afraid of his death squads? (i'm a little wary of them myself)

[Timewas]

4. Governing

By blackmail and lies