The U.S. Capitol on the evening of Tuesday, Sept. 30, 2025, just hours before a federal government shutdown. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Democrats and Republicans remained at a stalemate Wednesday as government offices closed and hundreds of thousands of federal workers faced furloughs on the first day of a government shutdown that showed no sign of ending.

Proposals from each side of the aisle to fund and reopen the government failed again during morning Senate votes, mirroring the same vote breakdowns as Tuesday evening, when lawmakers could not reach a deal hours before the government ran out of money.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected up to 750,000 federal workers could be furloughed, leading to a $400 million per day impact on the economy.

Locked in their positions, Republicans failed to pick up enough Democrats to reach the 60 votes needed to advance their plan to fund the government until Nov. 21. 

Senators will break Thursday to observe Yom Kippur but will return Friday to again vote on the funding proposals.

Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, along with independent Angus King of Maine, again joined Republicans in the 55-45 vote for the House-passed stopgap spending bill. GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky voted no.

Democrats also failed to find support to move forward their bill to fund the government through Oct. 31, roll back GOP cuts on Medicaid and permanently extend subsidies that tie the cost of Affordable  Care Act health insurance premiums to an enrollee’s income level. 

The Democrats failed to advance their plan in a party-line 47-53 vote. King, who caucuses with Democrats, voted in favor.

Shutdown tied to health care tax credits

Senate and House Democrats say they will not support a GOP path to reopen the government unless Republicans agree to negotiate on rising health care costs. 

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said at a press conference that Democrats are “ready to sit down with anyone at any time and at any place in order now to reopen the government, to enact a spending agreement that meets the needs of the American people and to address the devastating Republican health care crisis that has caused extraordinary harm on people all across the country.”

The New York Democrat pointed to harms in “rural America, working class America, urban America, small-town America, the heartland of America and Black and brown communities throughout America.” 

Democratic leaders blitzed Capitol Hill with their message on health care, holding press conferences and attending an evening rally Tuesday on the lawn outside the U.S. House. 

They pointed to new data published this week showing annual insurance premiums could double on average in 2026 if the subsidies expire at year’s end, according to an analysis from the nonprofit health policy research organization KFF. 

Open enrollment for next year’s ACA health insurance plans opens Nov. 1 in most states, and Oct. 15 in Idaho.

Uptake of ACA health insurance plans has more than doubled to over 24 million, up from 11 million, since the introduction of the subsidies in 2021, according to KFF. 

During their own budget reconciliation deal in 2022, Democrats extended the insurance premium tax credits until the end of 2025. The majority of ACA enrollees currently rely on the credits.

Democrats also want assurances that the White House and Senate Republicans will not cancel any more funds that have already been approved by Congress, as was the case this year when the administration and GOP lawmakers stripped funding for medical research, foreign aid and public broadcasting, among other areas.

‘This can all end today’

GOP leaders in the House and Senate continued to blame Senate Democrats for the government shutdown at the expense of furloughed federal workers and Americans who rely on their services. 

At a Wednesday morning press conference, House Speaker Mike Johnson said “troops and border patrol agents will have to go to work, but they’ll be working without pay.”

Johnson also claimed at the press conference that veterans benefits would stop. The claim is false, as Veterans Administration medical care will continue uninterrupted and vets will also continue to receive benefits, including compensation, pension, education and housing.

“As we speak here this morning, there are hundreds of thousands of federal workers who are getting their furlough notices. Nearly half of our civilian workforce is being sent home — these are hard-working Americans who work for our federal government,” the Louisiana Republican said, flanked by fellow GOP leaders on the Upper West Terrace of the U.S. Capitol overlooking the National Mall. 

Johnson decided in late September the House will be out until Oct. 6, canceling this week’s votes. 

The speaker said he will bring House members back next week, even if the government is still shut down.

“They would be here this week, except that we did our work — we passed the bill almost two weeks ago out of the House, sent it to the Senate,” Johnson said. “The ball is literally in (Senate Minority Leader) Chuck Schumer’s court, so he determines that.” 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said “this can all end today” and “needs to end today.”

The South Dakota Republican said the funding lapse can cease when Senate Democrats vote for the GOP’s “clean” short-term funding bill. 

“We will continue to work together with our House counterparts, with the president of the United States, to get this government open again on behalf of the American people,” Thune said. 

Bipartisan deal and Trump

Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine said later in the day that a bipartisan group huddled on the floor during votes to talk about a possible path forward on “health care fixes” and ensuring that if a bipartisan deal is brokered, the Trump administration will stick to it. 

Republican senators, he said, could give Democrats assurances they won’t vote for any more rescissions requests from the White House, which ask Congress to cancel already approved government spending. But other issues, like laying off federal workers by the hundreds or thousands, have to be a promise from the president. 

“If I find a deal, should Congress have to follow it? Yes. Should the president have to follow it? Yes. Well, what if the president won’t follow it? Oh, yeah, you got a problem,” Kaine said. “So you know, rescission, impoundment, those are Senate words. But a deal is a deal — people get that.”

Kaine also emphasized that it’s not a “clean” stopgap funding bill if the Trump administration unilaterally cancels some of the spending. 

“In the past, we voted for clean (continuing resolutions), but the president has shown that he’ll take the money back,” Kaine said, referring to the technical name for a short-term funding bill. “I mean, just in Virginia, canceling $400 million to our public health, $40 million economic projects just pulled off the table, firing more Virginians than any president. 

“So we just want you to agree, if we do a deal, then you’ll honor the deal,” Kaine said. “It’s not that much to ask.”

‘People are suffering’

North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis said he doesn’t expect the shutdown will have long-term ramifications for senators’ ability to negotiate bipartisan deals — a necessity in the upper chamber, which has a 60-vote threshold to advance legislation. 

“It’s all transactional,” Tillis said. “I think there’s going to be opportunities for some bipartisan work, but none of that happens, you can’t even really consider it when you’re in a shutdown posture.”

Cortez Masto, who voted to advance Republicans’ seven-week stopgap bill, said the GOP “created this crisis” on health care and “need to address it.”

“They have no moral standing — no moral standing —- to say that this is all on the Democrats. They are in control. They’ve created this crisis,” Cortez Masto said. “People are suffering and they need to come to the table.” 

Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley, who was sworn in for the first time during the last shutdown, said he worries about longer-term effects. 

“My concern is it’s going to poison the well on negotiations going forward on a lot of things,” Hawley said. “I can’t speak for anybody but myself, but I would just say that these tactics are very destructive. And it’s destructive, not just for relationships, but for real people.”

Ariana Figueroa contributed to this report.

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell administers the oath of office to Lisa Cook to serve as a member of the Board of Governors at the Federal Reserve System during a ceremony at the William McChesney Martin Jr. Building of the Federal Reserve May 23, 2022, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration made public Wednesday its plans to appeal a lower court ruling that keeps Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook on the independent central bank’s board, for now.  

In a 49-page opinion released late Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Jia M. Cobb wrote that President Donald Trump “violated the Federal Reserve Act because (Cook’s) purported removal did not comply with the statute’s ‘for cause’ requirement” and that his attempts to remove Cook from the board “deprived her of procedural rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.”

Trump said in late August that he wanted to remove Cook, the first Black woman to serve on the Federal Reserve Board, alleging she falsified some information in a mortgage application. 

Cook’s attorneys filed a lawsuit in federal court a few days later, arguing that Trump’s attempts were political and violated her due process rights. 

Trump’s targeting of Cook comes amid his pressure campaign on Federal Reserve Board Chair Jerome Powell to lower interest rates. 

Trump, who has been angling for more influence over the central bank, swiftly nominated his adviser Stephen Miran to fill a separate vacancy on the board ahead of the Fed’s meeting next week where members are widely expected to lower rates.

U.S. Senate Republicans advanced Miran’s nomination out of committee Wednesday morning. Miran is the chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers.

Ruling seen as affirming Fed independence

Cobb said the case marks the first time in the Federal Reserve’s 111-year history that a president has sought to remove one of its members “for cause.”

The Federal Reserve Act doesn’t actually define what “for cause” entails, but Cobb wrote that reasons for firing under the law “are limited to grounds concerning an official’s behavior in office and whether they have been faithfully and effectively executing statutory duties. 

“The ‘for cause’ standard thus does not contemplate removing an individual purely for conduct that occurred before they assumed the position.”

Cook’s attorney’s Abbe David Lowell, of Lowell and Associates, and Norm Eisen, head of the advocacy organization Democracy Defenders Fund, hailed the district court injunction.

“The court’s ruling recognizes and reaffirms the importance of safeguarding the independence of the Federal Reserve from illegal political interference,” Lowell and Eisen said in a statement Wednesday morning. 

“Allowing the president to unlawfully remove Governor Cook on unsubstantiated and vague allegations would endanger the stability of our financial system and undermine the rule of law. Governor Cook will continue to carry out her sworn duties as a Senate-confirmed Board Governor member.”

Judge Cobb agreed with their assessment that the president seeking to remove Cook represented irreparable harm and that “the public interest in Federal Reserve independence weighs in favor of Cook’s reinstatement.”

Cobb wrote that she “likely cannot directly ‘enjoin the President in the performance of his official duties’ to require him to reappoint Cook.” So she instead issued a preliminary injunction directing Powell “and the Board of Governors to allow Cook to continue to operate as a member of the Board for the pendency of this litigation.”

Attorneys for the Trump administration notified the district court they plan to appeal Cobb’s preliminary injunction to the the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. 

This story was updated at 4:33 p.m.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., walks back onto the Senate floor after speaking to reporters at the U.S. Capitol Building on June 30, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans were closing in Monday on passing their version of the “big beautiful” tax break and spending cut bill that President Donald Trump wants to make law by a self-imposed July Fourth deadline.

But the chamber’s Democrats first kicked off a marathon of amendment votes, forcing their GOP colleagues to go on the record on tough issues, including cuts to health and food safety net programs. As of early evening, Democrats had not prevailed on any votes.

The tactic is used by the opposition party during massive budget reconciliation fights to draw attention to specific issues even as their amendments are likely to fail.

Democrats decried numerous measures in the mega-bill, including new work reporting requirements for Medicaid, the federal-state health insurance program for low-income people and people with disabilities.

Loud opposition has also swelled as legislative proposals shift significant costs of the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, to states for the first time.

“I say to our colleagues, ‘Vote for families over billionaires,’” Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota said on the Senate floor.

The heart of the nearly 1,000-page legislation extends and expands the 2017 tax law to keep individual income tax rates at the same level and makes permanent some tax breaks on business investments and research and development costs.

The bill would also put in motion some of Trump’s campaign promises, including no tax on qualifying tips, overtime or car loan interest, but only for a few years.

The tax cuts are estimated to cost nearly $4.5 trillion over 10 years, and a provision in the bill raises the nation’s borrowing limit to $5 trillion as the United States faces record levels of debt.

Overall, the Senate bill is projected to add $3.25 trillion to deficits during the next decade, according to the latest calculation from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Here are some key votes so far:

Planned Parenthood 

Washington Democratic Sen. Patty Murray tried to remove language from the bill that would block Medicaid payments from going to Planned Parenthood for one year unless the organization stops performing abortions.

Federal law already bars funding from going toward abortions, with limited exceptions, but GOP lawmakers have proposed blocking any other funding from going to the organization, effectively blocking Medicaid patients from going to Planned Parenthood for other types of health care.

Murray said the proposal would have a detrimental impact on health care for lower-income women and called it a “long-sought goal of anti-choice extremists.”

“Republicans’ bill will cut millions of women off from birth control, cancer screenings, essential preventive health care — care that they will not be able to afford anywhere else,” Murray said. “And it will shutter some 200 health care clinics in our country.”

Mississippi Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith opposed efforts to remove the policy change and raised a budget point of order, which was not waived following a 49-51 vote. Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins and Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski voted with Democrats.

“There was a time when protecting American tax dollars from supporting the abortion industry was an uncontroversial, nonpartisan effort that we could all get behind,” Hyde-Smith said.

Medicaid for undocumented immigrants

Senators from both political parties crossed the aisle over whether the federal government should reduce how much a state is given for its Medicaid program if that state uses its own taxpayer dollars to enroll immigrants living in the country without proper documentation.

The provision was included in an earlier version of the bill, but the Senate parliamentarian ruled it didn’t comply with the complex rules for moving a budget reconciliation bill.

The vote was 56-44, but since it was on waiving a budget point of order, at least 60 senators had to agree to set aside the rules and move forward with the amendment, so the vote failed.

Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, and Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock of Georgia voted with GOP senators. Maine’s Collins voted with most of the chamber’s Democrats against moving forward.

Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn asked for the vote, saying he believes the policy change would reduce undocumented immigration.

“Border patrol talks about push and pull factors,” Cornyn said. “One of the pull factors for illegal immigration is the knowledge that people will be able to receive various benefits once they make it into the country.”

Senate Budget Committee ranking member Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., opposed Cornyn’s attempt to get the language back in the bill, saying the policy change would financially harm states that expanded Medicaid under the 2010 health care law for simple mistakes.

“What this amendment says is that if one person, despite state law, through a bureaucratic mistake, is receiving funds, then the whole state pays the price and has their rate on expanded Medicaid changed from 90% to 80%,” Merkley said, referring to the percentage paid by the federal government.

Reduction in funding for Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

An amendment to stop a nearly 50% reduction in funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was blocked by Republican Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, who chairs the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat who championed the CFPB after the 2008 financial collapse, attempted to bring the amendment to the floor saying the agency “is the financial watchdog to keep people from getting cheated on credit cards and mortgages and Venmo and payday loans and a zillion other transactions.”

“When this financial cop can’t do its job there is no one else in the federal government to pick up the slack,” Warren said.

Scott blocked her using a budget point of order, saying the reduction still provides “ample funding” for the agency. Democrats tried to waive that procedural tactic, but failed following a 47-53 vote.

An original provision to completely zero out the budget for the CFPB was not included because it did not meet the reconciliation process’ parameters.

Medicaid hospitals and maternal mortality

Senators voted 48-52 to reject Delaware Democratic Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester’s proposals to send the legislation back to committee to remove language cutting certain funding for Medicaid, which she said would negatively impact “vital hospital services, especially labor and delivery rooms.”

“Today, Medicaid is the single largest payer of maternity care in the United States, covering 40% of births nationwide and nearly half of the births in our rural communities,” Blunt Rochester said. “Obstetric units, particularly in rural hospitals, are closing at alarming rates, actually creating maternity deserts.”

No Republicans spoke in opposition to the proposal, though Maine’s Collins voted in support. 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

New Mexico Democratic Sen. Ben Ray Luján offered a motion to commit the bill back to committee in order to remove all changes related to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. It was rejected following a 49-51 vote, though Alaska Republican Sens. Dan Sullivan and Murkowski voted in favor.

“I’m offering my colleagues the opportunity to step away from these devastating cuts, to show our fellow Americans that in this country we care for our friends, family and neighbors who need support,” Luján said.

Senate Agriculture Chairman John Boozman, R-Ark., opposed the proposals, saying that SNAP is “on an unsustainable path wrought with mismanagement and waste.”

“This program has devolved into viewing success as enrolling more individuals to be dependent on government assistance,” Boozman said. “SNAP is long overdue for change.”

Medicaid work requirements

Senators voted 48-52 to reject a proposal from Delaware Democratic Sen. Chris Coons that would have sent the bill back to committee to remove language requiring Medicaid enrollees to work, participate in community service, or attend an educational program at least 80 hours a month. Alaska’s Murkowski was the only member of her party to vote in favor of the effort.

Democrats have expressed concern for weeks that some people would lose access to Medicaid if they forgot to complete paperwork proving that time commitment or didn’t understand how to show the government they met the new requirement.

“It is cruel and dishonest to bury patients, kids and seniors in paperwork and then blame them when they lose their health care, all to further rig our tax code for the very wealthiest,” Coons said.

Kansas Republican Sen. Roger Marshall urged opposition to the proposal, saying that working helps people.

“My question is, don’t you think a job brings value, that it brings dignity?” Marshall said. “Do you not think it brings purpose and meaning to life?”

Rural hospitals and Medicaid

Maine’s Collins and Alaska’s Murkowski both voted for a proposal from Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Ed Markey that would have removed parts of the bill changing Medicaid.

But even with some bipartisan support, the changes were rejected on a 49-51 vote that would have technically sent the bill back to committee for three days to implement the changes.

“My Republican colleagues’ so-called Medicaid cuts replacement fund is like giving aspirin to a cancer patient,” Markey said. “It is not enough. It is pathetically inadequate to deal with the health care crisis Republicans are creating here today on the Senate floor. No billionaire tax break or Donald Trump pat-on-the-back is worth the risk of people’s lives.”

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, spoke out against the proposal, saying that rural hospitals have long had financial challenges and that it was clearly “intended to derail this very bill.”

“Unfortunately for far too long some rural hospitals have struggled to achieve financial stability, even with a wide-range of targeted payment enhances,” Crapo said. “These issues pre-date the consideration of the reforms that we are including in the legislation today.”