WASHINGTON — The U.S. House approved a short-term government funding bill Tuesday that would avoid a shutdown this fall once President Donald Trump signs it. 

The 370-48 vote showed neither Republicans nor Democrats want a repeat of the funding lapse that took place last year when disagreement over enhanced Affordable Care Act tax credits led to a historic 43-day shutdown. 

The stopgap spending bill, which the Senate approved in early August, would provide mostly flat funding for federal departments and agencies to keep up and running from the start of the new fiscal year on Oct. 1 through Dec. 11. 

The short-term funding patch is supposed to give Congress more time to reach bipartisan agreement on the dozen annual appropriations bills. Absent that, lawmakers can pass a series of stopgap spending bills or force another government shutdown. 

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., said during floor debate the bill doesn’t include any “poison pills” or “partisan riders.”

“The bill before us is a clean, narrowly tailored continuing resolution that keeps the government open and operating. Nothing more. Nothing less,” he said. “It gives the nation and our constituents certainty.”

The measure, Cole said, would “allow Congress time to get past the November elections and allow us time to assess and move forward with further appropriations measures in November and December.” 

Connecticut Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro, ranking member on the committee, said the bill doesn’t include any additional funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and would block the administration from moving any of the money to the Border Patrol. 

Republicans in Congress approved a $70 billion package earlier this year intended to fund ICE and the Border Patrol for the next three years. That funding was on top of the roughly $170 billion for immigration enforcement included in the GOP’s “big, beautiful” law.

“We will not support a single cent in further funding without substantial reforms to protect our communities from abuse,” DeLauro said during debate. 

The stopgap spending bill, she said, “is in no way a substitute for the full-year funding process. It is merely a means to complete this important work while averting a lapse in government funding.”

Senate action

Senators voted 96-0 to approve the spending measure in early August after making changes to a bill the House passed in late July. 

The White House indicated last month that Trump plans to sign the bill when it reaches his desk, writing in a Statement of Administration Policy that the president “strongly opposes another futile Government shutdown.”

“Every Member of Congress should support passage of this CR to keep the Government open as discussions on full-year appropriations continue,” it said.

The current version of the legislation “closes the loophole that would have allowed the Trump administration to transfer funding for other programs to Border Patrol” and “extends authorizations of important health, veterans, infrastructure, and other programs,” according to a summary from Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash.

Rule on grantmaking blocked

The bill also blocks the White House budget office from moving forward during the next few months with a rule that would give political appointees more influence over grants.

Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, wrote in a letter released in early July that “rule would impose new, burdensome requirements on award recipients that would harm small and rural communities, undermine scientific and biomedical research, and conflict with Congress’ control over the federal funding process.”

Democrats in Congress also oppose the proposed rule, arguing it “will make it impossible for grant recipients to faithfully carry out the funding priorities that Congress establishes in statute, and would turn federal grants into a new cudgel for the President to unilaterally advance his partisan agenda and punish political rivals.”

 

WASHINGTON — The stopgap spending bill supported by an overwhelming majority of U.S. senators does not address tens of billions in expiring transportation funding, leaving states facing a massive effective budget cut starting Oct. 1.

The 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law, which authorized highway and transit programs for five years, expires Sept. 30. Roughly $38.6 billion per year in extra federal transportation funding is set to expire with it, even if the continuing resolution the Senate advanced 89-4 Monday becomes law.

The stopgap measure, a version of which has also passed the House, would keep the government funded mostly at current levels, and reauthorize highway and transit programs through Dec. 11.

But it would not renew the advance appropriations that provided $184 billion over five years for a host of transportation programs under the infrastructure law President Joe Biden signed in his first year in office.

Ben Gilsdorf, an associate legislative director for transportation at the National Association of Counties, said in a Tuesday interview that the advance appropriations funded many of the group’s top transportation priorities.

“It’s not all of the programs under (the infrastructure law) that would stop without an extension,” he said. “But for us, it’s several of the most impactful ones.”

The National Association of Counties was part of a broad range of advocacy groups representing business, labor, cities, state departments of transportation and every mode of transportation that signed a letter last month asking Congress to extend the supplemental funding.

Funding for Transportation Department programs makes up a bit more than half of the total advance appropriations in the infrastructure law, which also includes major funding for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Energy Department and telecommunications program.

The total advance appropriations for fiscal 2026 were about $66.2 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Bridges, airports, transit and more

The DOT funding largely flows to state departments of transportation.

Returning to pre-2021 baseline infrastructure spending would leave every state with less federal funding to cover varied transportation needs.

About 30%, $10.8 billion per year, of the extra transportation funding is determined by formula, meaning the amounts sent to each state vary based on population, highway miles and other factors.

California is the only state that would lose 10 figures worth of funding, at nearly $1.1 billion.

But even Vermont, the state with the lowest total funding lost, would see $55.6 million less in formula funds if the funding is not extended, according to data Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Patty Murray of Washington sent to her fellow Democratic senators last month.

A total of 10 formula programs representing different modes of transportation would be affected, according to the fact sheet from Murray’s office.

More than half of the formula funding, $5.5 billion, is slated for the Federal Highway Administration’s bridge repair program.

Airport construction funds represent the next-greatest funding at $3 billion per year. The Federal Transit Administration’s grant program to maintain transit system infrastructure would lose $950 million and state transportation departments would lose another $900 million in federal funding for electric vehicle charging stations.

Other affected programs are for highways in Appalachian states, truck safety inspections, ferry boats and terminals, FTA grants for senior passengers and those with disabilities and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration programs.

In addition to formula funds, the remaining 70% of advance appropriations is distributed via 25 competitive grant programs, according to the Murray document.

Grant programs to fund ports, large highway and rail projects, transit station upgrades, roadway safety and other projects would be among those losing funding.

Complicating spending negotiations

While the law that initiated the additional funding was bipartisan, there are indications an extension could be a more partisan issue.

Murray said ahead of the Senate floor vote Monday that Republicans did not “agree to our efforts to extend critical advance appropriations for infrastructure” and vowed to continue pursuing the additional funds.

Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, did not reference advance appropriations in a press release announcing a deal on the stopgap bill.

Republicans, who hold majorities in both chambers of Congress, may prefer to settle the future of the funding through a long-term surface transportation bill or full-year appropriations measure, Gilsdorf said.

Even if the Senate bill is enacted, there will be an opportunity when it expires to revisit the issue, he said.

“There’d be another bite at the apple,” he said.

A person familiar with negotiations who was not authorized to speak on the record said Tuesday that the advance appropriations in the 2021 law were meant to be one-time funding, and that extending them in a stopgap measure meant to preserve the status quo would be inappropriate.

The funding is part of a larger policy debate than is usually considered in a continuing resolution, the person said.

The issue could hang over negotiations for full-year spending bills, likely to begin in earnest after November’s elections.

Senate appropriators have not reached a deal for top-line spending levels for fiscal 2027.

Republicans, at President Donald Trump’s urging, are seeking a massive boost to defense programs.

Democrats historically seek parity between non-defense and defense spending, but have relaxed that stance while the extra infrastructure funds have been flowing. Without that additional funding, Democrats might be less amenable to compromise.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. House approved a stopgap spending bill Tuesday that would keep the government up and running through the fall, sending it to the Senate, where lawmakers expect to rework the measure.

Congress must pass a government funding bill before the new fiscal year starts on Oct. 1 in order to avoid a shutdown just weeks before the November midterm elections.

The 220-205 mostly party-line vote represents House Republicans’ opening salvo in negotiations, though without Democratic support it won’t be able to advance in the Senate. 

House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., said during floor debate that GOP leaders hope passing the stopgap spending bill months before the start of the next fiscal year will avoid another shutdown. 

“For anyone questioning this legislation, the facts are simple — it extends the government funding deadline to Dec. 4, denying any party the opportunity to manufacture leverage before elections,” Cole said. “It contains no poison pills or partisan riders. It prevents harmful disruptions to our national security and the vital programs our constituents rely on.”

Connecticut Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro, ranking member on the committee, opposed the stopgap, saying it would “allow Homeland Secretary (Markwayne) Mullin to transfer billions of dollars to the Border Patrol.”

Republicans, she said, “refused” to change that aspect of the bill after Democrats “shared language to fix it.”

“We cannot in good conscience allow billions of dollars to flow to these agencies without major reforms to keep our constituents safe from further violence,” DeLauro said. 

Democrats don’t want a government shutdown but also don’t want “to rush” the process and omit the list of anomalies just sent up by the White House, she said. 

Those tweaks to funding levels are commonly added to stopgap spending bills but weren’t included in House Republicans’ measure because it was written before the White House sent a list of requested anomalies to lawmakers Monday. 

“There are over 50 programs listed by the agencies to take some action so that they can be protected during a continuing resolution,” DeLauro said, using the technical term for a short-term funding bill. 

The changes would support wildfire suppression activities, housing assistance for tens of thousands and programs that help people in rural communities afford their utilities.

“Rushing this bill to the floor haphazardly without carefully considering the various needs that must be met is no way to govern,” DeLauro said. “And it is irresponsible.” 

Senate anticipates changes

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, said earlier in the day that she was working with the committee’s top Democrat, Washington Sen. Patty Murray, to draft a continuing resolution of their own. 

“It appears that there is good faith on the Democratic side to try to pass the CR and avoid a government shutdown, which is always a disaster,” Collins said. 

Murray said the House’s stopgap spending bill has “problems” that will need to be fixed in order to move through the Senate.

“We just got the anomalies last night and both of us are trying to figure out the best way to get it put together,” Murray said. 

Appropriations status

Lawmakers must lean on a stopgap spending bill because they will, once again, fail to complete work on the dozen annual government funding bills before the deadline. 

The House has passed three of its spending bills. The Senate hasn’t passed any, in part, because the committee hasn’t released a single bill. The two chambers will need to begin negotiations at some point to settle on a total spending level for the 12 bills and how that roughly $1.9 trillion will be broken down among thousands of federal agencies and programs. 

That means the earliest the full-year government spending bills would become law is during the lame-duck session that is set to last for about five weeks between the election and the start of the new Congress in January. 

Lawmakers could also pass a series of stopgap funding bills instead of completing negotiations on the full-year appropriations bills.