Progressive Democrats are signaling they don’t want another government shutdown right now, even as a funding cliff on January 30, 2026, and the debate over enhanced Obamacare subsidies create fresh leverage and tensions on Capitol Hill.
Washington is creeping back toward a familiar fight: federal funding expires on January 30, 2026, and the dispute over enhanced premium tax credits is central. Conservatives in the House have pushed market-oriented fixes, arguing Republicans should let citizens pool together to buy insurance in groups to lower premiums. That proposal makes moderates jittery while Democrats weigh whether to use a looming deadline as leverage.
For the moment, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party appears reluctant to dive into another shutdown showdown, even after internal divisions reopened the government earlier this season. That caution is tactical, not principled, and it can change quickly as political incentives shift heading into a midterm year. Lawmakers on both sides are watching how bipartisan talks on expiring subsidies and the appropriations process unfold early in January.
…even progressives who disliked the deal to end the shutdown said the party is not discussing plunging into another one.
“There’s been no discussion about shutdowns. I haven’t heard a word by any of my colleagues about a shutdown,” Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt., told Semafor. “And the last time in the run-up there was discussion about what we wanted: health care. But I haven’t heard that discussion now.”
To be clear, Democrats aren’t quite giving up all their leverage in either chamber of Congress for January; they could change their minds depending on how bipartisan talks on the expiring enhanced premium tax credits go next month.
They also want to assess how progress on bipartisan spending bills; if those pieces stall out, it will require another stopgap spending bill that Democrats will not like.
[…]
Just eight Senate Democrats and six House Democrats supported the deal to reopen the government, which included three full-year funding bills through Sept. 30. Those would make another shutdown less painful — SNAP is funded through them, for example.
Nonetheless, Democrats are actively debating how to fund the government through the regular process or potentially face another take-it-or-leave-it stopgap bill from the House. These decisions will be made in the context of whether an unlikely health care deal comes together.
“We’re working on appropriation bills to prevent another shutdown, now,” said Sen. Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M. “Let’s see what January brings. But people are hurting. Everything’s getting more expensive.”
[…]
“First we have to see how the appropriations process is working to really get a better sense of that a couple weeks into January,” added the more centrist Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich. “It’s a little premature to try to speculate that right now.”
But after a painful split in reopening the government, Democrats are back to a more unified position. Even the party’s more progressive members say they want to get regular spending bills done, which would potentially take the government shutdown threat off the table or at least mitigate the effects of one.
“In an ideal world, we pass the appropriations bills. That is the mission,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore.
That quoted snapshot shows how fragile any consensus remains: only a small group of Democrats voted to reopen the government, and the larger caucus is still figuring out whether to rely on appropriations work or brinkmanship. Republicans should take that as both an opportunity and a warning. Opportunity, because divided parties make for leverage in negotiations; warning, because unpredictable choices by the other side can force conservatives into unplanned concessions if the House caves to a partisan stopgap.
Policy-wise, the real fight will revolve around health care subsidies and how to stabilize markets without expanding federal dependency. The conservative case is plain: reduce costs by increasing competition and letting consumers band together to buy coverage, rather than padding programs with open-ended subsidies that distort incentives. Moderates in both parties fret about immediate political pain, but the long-term debate is about whether Washington creates sustainable markets or permanent fiscal obligations.
Practical politics matter too. Passing regular appropriations bills would blunt the shutdown threat and shield programs like SNAP from rolling interruptions. But passing those bills requires discipline and a willingness to negotiate across chambers while keeping base voters in line. If bipartisanship stalls, Washington will default to stopgaps, and the next funding cliff could produce chaos rather than a clean policy resolution.
From a Republican perspective, the smart play is to hold a firm line on spending priorities while offering targeted market-based fixes to health care costs that voters can understand. Democrats may prefer messaging battles and short-term fixes to satisfy their coalition, but the electorate tends to punish chaos more than clever positioning. That makes January a test of seriousness for both sides: can Congress do the messy work of appropriations, or will it surrender to crisis politics again?
Either way, keep an eye on the calendar. January’s early weeks will tell whether leaders opt for steady budget work or political theater. For conservatives, the choice is clear: push for durable reforms that lower premiums and restrain spending, while resisting last-minute deals that lock in long-term liabilities. The country deserves policy that fixes problems, not more Washington stunt politics.
