Republican lawmakers are facing internal conflict over the strategy to avoid a government shutdown deadline. As the new fiscal year begins on October 1, they have just 14 legislative days in session to reach a decision. Some members of the House Freedom Caucus have proposed a full-year continuing resolution to fund government operations. However, defense hawks and others have expressed strong opposition to the idea, as they believe it might hurt military funding and could lead to further budgetary problems. There is growing concern that the existing process may not be enough to prevent a shutdown. The situation is becoming increasingly complex as the number of legislative days is shrinking, and the time to act is becoming more urgent.
The intra-GOP battle over the appropriate strategy to avert a government shutdown before the next fiscal year begins is now intensifying. Congress needs to strike a deal on funding the federal government by October 1, but with the August recess, only 14 legislative days remain with both chambers in session. This is a tight window, particularly given that both House and Senate Republicans are working with three-seat majorities. The challenge is compounded by the fact that a continuing resolution, which extends fiscal year 2025 funding levels, is a contentious topic among lawmakers.
Some fiscal conservatives in the House have suggested a full-year CR could be a viable solution. House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., has argued that a funding freeze in a setting of 2.7% inflation actually represents a real cut in the size of the government. Others, like Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., have expressed openness to the idea, but with reservations, stating that a CR is somewhat of a surrender. However, some lawmakers, including Rep. Eli Crane, R-Ariz., have voiced concern over the potential impact on military funding.
While some lawmakers believe a short-term CR could provide the necessary breathing room for appropriators to reach a deal and avoid a shutdown, others are wary of the risks. A House GOP source, speaking under the condition of anonymity, warned that a CR encompassing everything could have dangerous effects on military funding, which has been a key focus in the Republican Party’s agenda. This has further fueled the debate within the party, as there are growing fears that the current strategy may not be enough to prevent a shutdown and that the situation could worsen without a clear resolution.
With the House on recess and the Senate potentially staying in session for part of August, time is running out for lawmakers to reach an agreement. Many Republicans suggest that a short-term CR is the most practical option, but there is strong resistance to any form of CR from a segment of the conservative base. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., has explicitly rejected the idea of a September 30th CR, arguing that it is unacceptable. Others, like Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., have pointed out that the FY2025 funding levels were set under the Biden administration, highlighting the political context of the debate.
Senate Republicans are also divided, with many expressing a preference for an actual appropriations process rather than continuing the status quo of CRs. Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fl., has voiced a desire to focus on Trump’s roughly $1.7 trillion budget, which he submitted earlier this year, rather than resorting to a CR. Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Mike Rounds, R-S.D., has emphasized the need for Congress to take responsibility for examining spending rather than simply continuing existing funding levels. This is a major point of contention, as it reflects broader ideological differences about the role of government spending and the direction of fiscal policy.
As the clock ticks down toward the October 1 deadline, the GOP’s internal conflict is intensifying. With the time window narrowing and the pressure to avoid a government shutdown mounting, Republicans must find a path forward that balances fiscal responsibility with the need to meet their legislative deadlines.