T
This piece is a segment of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s newsletter focused on politics. Subscribe
here
to get similar updates directly in your inbox.
On Friday, the Senate made significant moves to avert a government shutdown, effectively ceding spending authority to President Donald Trump and relegating Congress to an advisory role. This shift has ignited frustration among the Democratic base, signifying a considerable retreat for the party.
A significant portion of the backlash is aimed at Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, who, just a day earlier, suggested that the fight was over and it was time to look forward. The choice was clear: maintain a functioning government, albeit limited, or face a complete shutdown, and the outcomes are telling.
Nevertheless, this does not mean party members were pleased with the resolution.
When questioned about the necessity for new leadership among Senate Democrats, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries sidestepped support for Schumer, curtly responding, “Next question.” Conversations have emerged in various circles regarding the prospect of challenging Schumer in the 2028 primaries.
On Friday, nine Senate Democrats, along with Independent Angus King of Maine, sided with nearly all Senate Republicans to prevent a government shutdown. The temporary funding measure grants the White House expanded authority to halt various federal operations and eliminate thousands of jobs. Hence, Congress is, at least until September 30, effectively giving the executive branch considerable leeway regarding the funds they manage.
This decision marked a disappointing culmination to a tumultuous week for Democrats. Amid the chaotic developments from the Trump administration—including new executive orders, personnel changes, and tariffs—they were also faced with the impending threat of a government shutdown. House Republicans advanced a spending plan that many Democrats found particularly troubling due to its cuts impacting the District of Columbia. Consequently, the House adjourned, leaving the Senate with no chance to modify the budget. Initially, Schumer claimed that the proposed framework lacked adequate support, only to change his stance the following day and endorse the spending plan to avert a shutdown.
The sudden transition from a shutdown mindset to a compromise approach further fueled the dissatisfaction many Democrats felt towards their leadership.
“Whatever happens will happen,” remarked Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who voted against the plan and used the lead-up to express a sense of grim resignation.
This sense of resignation has become increasingly evident in Washington in recent weeks. The discord among various anti-Trump factions has quieted as Trump’s assertive control over the budgeting process seemed increasingly inevitable. The victorious atmosphere in the White House, coupled with the antics surrounding its favored project DOGE, has only heightened the frustrations of Democrats striving to uphold the integrity of federal operations.
Ultimately, the Democrats positioned to challenge Trump and his Republican allies capitulated. Although the GOP holds majorities in both the House and Senate, as well as the presidency, Senate rules require 60 votes to initiate proceedings, and Republicans only had 52 votes in the Upper Chamber. This necessitated GOP lawmakers to gather eight Democratic votes to proceed.
Senate Democrats analyzed the numbers, polling data, and their own capabilities. They concluded that their aspiration to oppose Trump’s expansive authority did not align with their ability to do so effectively. Political scientists often assert that real power resides where will and capacity intersect. Democrats had the power to instigate a government shutdown but lacked the means to convincingly assign blame to Republicans or present a unified strategy for reopening the government under better conditions.
The immediate concern now is how Democrats navigate the situation surrounding Schumer. Currently, there is a notable silence, but whispers of discontent are growing regarding Schumer’s future as Minority Leader for the remainder of this term. Both progressive factions and the broader party base are uneasy about this decision, and guiding the party through the tumultuous waters leading up to 2026 is no small task.
To clarify: Schumer’s position is not under immediate threat, and Democrats are not inclined to engage in a self-destructive power struggle akin to their House counterparts. Schumer makes decisions based on strategic calculations rather than impulsive choices. His agreement to prioritize keeping the government operational at the expense of legislative authority stemmed from a rational evaluation rather than recklessness. Yet, this choice carries consequences, particularly regarding his standing among disaffected Democrats who expect the opposition party to actively challenge an administration intent on undermining a government it clearly disdains.
For now, the government continues. However, the Democrats’ ability to counter Trump is noticeably diminished. Until Congress reassesses its position, the legislative branch remains subordinate to the executive.
Stay updated on key happenings in Washington.
Subscribe to the D.C. Brief newsletter
.
