The Archive

IN THIS EDITION

Is the government going to shut down? It’s time to talk about that

Republicans stick together on defense spending despite foreign policy split

Rosen, Husted and Ricketts launch effort to ban DeepSeek on government devices

The rising Hill Democratic stars

The Ones to Watch: Advancing with AI

THE TOP

Is the government going to shut down? It’s time to talk about that

Happy Thursday morning.

Let’s talk about the politics of a potential government shutdown and what’s happening in the negotiations to avert one with the March 14 funding deadline looming. That’s just 15 days away. It’s been a bit obscured by the budget resolution fight.

After weeks of talks, the two sides remain deadlocked over Democratic demands that GOP leaders guarantee President Donald Trump will spend funds as Congress mandates. Meaning in their view, follow the law. House and Senate Republicans refuse to go along with this, adding that Trump will never sign a bill that includes such language.

So to avoid a shutdown, the debate inside leadership circles in both chambers has shifted to a year-long CR through Sept. 30. We’ll note, these kinds of measures are difficult to draft and pass. The Pentagon, in particular, would be strongly opposed to a long-term CR, seeing it as a setback in funding complex, multi-year projects and programs.

On CNN last night, Speaker Mike Johnson told Kaitlan Collins that he wants anomalies – special provisions in a CR — to account for DOGE spending cuts. Why would Democrats agree to this? They probably wouldn’t.

The challenge for House Republican leaders will be to get a CR on the floor. They will need to pass a rule – the procedural motion – with only GOP votes. If they’re able to do that, there’s a chance they can win some Democratic votes for the underlying bill.

Republican leaders also privately want Trump and top White House officials to tell them which anomalies they need in any long-term CR package. That hasn’t happened yet, leaving Republicans unsure of the White House’s must-haves.

“It looks as though it’s becoming inevitable at this point,” Johnson said of a long-term CR following a White House meeting with Trump and Senate Majority Leader John Thune on Wednesday. Johnson suggested Democrats’ demands “may be unconstitutional.”

“We have never dictated to the executive, so far as I know in the history of the United States, whom they can hire and how many people they can hire,” Johnson added.

But Rep. Rosa DeLauro (Conn.), the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, pushed back hard at Johnson.

“I don’t know who the speaker talks to. He may be talking to himself in his office,” DeLauro said of a long-term CR. “Nowhere has that come up anyplace. The speaker ought to really check with the chairman of the committee.”

When asked whether the bipartisan, bicameral funding talks are yielding any progress, DeLauro insisted they were.

“We are getting closer. That’s what you need to know,” DeLauro said.

But there’s also a lot of discussion in Democratic ranks over whether they should oppose any CR package, forcing Republicans to pass the measure themselves or face a shutdown.

Both Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries have been deliberately vague here. Although, if you talk to Democratic leadership aides, they all believe a shutdown is terrible politics for their side. Democrats have blistered Republicans over shutdowns for decades. To have a hand in one now — even indirectly — would open Democrats up to heavy criticism.

Some Democrats are even questioning whether it’s worth using the funding deadline to push back on mega-billionaire Elon Musk and DOGE.

“What makes us think if we put more language in there, he’s gonna pay any attention to that? He’s on a lawless rampage, and there’s nothing stopping him,” Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) told us. “The big question will be if he faces a judicial order and disregards it.”

Government-employee unions are also pro-Democratic, meaning their supporters would be hit hard by any significant shutdown.

Yet that hasn’t stopped some rank-and-file Democrats from saying the burden is on Trump and Republicans to avoid a shutdown.

“We don’t want a government shutdown,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “Republicans are in the majority and they need to come up with a plan.”

Let’s go back to Trump. His administration will have enormous latitude on how painful a shutdown is for the American public. Large swaths of federal employees are categorized as essential and must come to work despite a shutdown. Trump could use his authority to try to further minimize any disruption. For instance, Trump could order national parks to stay open during a shutdown, as he did during the 2018-2019 partial shutdown, even though “non-essential” staffers weren’t there.

All of this is playing out against the backdrop of widespread layoffs of federal employees directed by Musk’s DOGE.

A shutdown could actually play into Trump and Musk’s hands by buttressing their argument that much of the federal government can and should be slashed.

At Trump’s direction, OMB and the Office of Personnel Management are moving ahead with plans for a “significant reduction in the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) positions by eliminating positions that are not required,” as well as selling off federal properties. Shifting federal personnel outside Washington is part of this plan.

But Democrats want to drag Musk into this fight — pretty much every fight — because he’s unpopular and easier to bash politically than Trump. Even top GOP appropriators admit that the DOGE controversy isn’t helping them in trying to cut a funding deal.

“It does. I think Democrats have genuine concerns about that in particular,” House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said in an interview.

The bottom line: A government shutdown isn’t inevitable at this point. There’ll be a lot of back-and-forth leading up to the deadline. But this is exactly the kind of scenario where both sides could blunder into a shutdown, with federal workers feeling the brunt of the pain. Again.

— John Bresnahan, Samantha Handler and Andrew Desiderio

Want to make sure your whole office has the full Punchbowl News experience? We have team plans available for companies, organizations, classes, Capitol Hill offices and more. Fill out this form and find out if your team is eligible for a discount.

WASHINGTON X THE WORLD

Republicans stick together on defense spending despite foreign policy split

Republicans’ fissures on foreign policy have been on full display the past few weeks as the GOP’s Russia hawks have expressed unease with President Donald Trump’s posture on Ukraine and NATO as he pushes for a peace deal with Moscow.

But despite these disagreements on policy and rhetoric, there’s surprisingly little dissent as GOP leaders set the stage for an unprecedented hike in defense spending.

Between budget reconciliation and Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker’s (R-Miss.) plan to boost the Pentagon’s topline funding number, Republicans are setting the stage for major new investments even as Trump takes U.S. foreign policy in an entirely new direction — often to the dismay of hawks like Wicker.

“This is actually where, if you have a Venn diagram, we come together — no matter where you stand on Ukraine or should we continue to be the global cop,” Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.), a close Trump ally, said of boosting Pentagon spending. “But with Roger Wicker — on that committee, you just don’t see much disagreement on that.”

Yet it’s Schmitt’s camp, led by Trump and Vice President JD Vance, that’s winning out on the policy front, with Wicker and his allies publicly breaking with the Trump team over their actions and rhetoric on Russia and Ukraine.

Risks for the hawks: The GOP skeptics of Trump’s bid to clinch a diplomatic agreement with Russia and end the Ukraine war have little, if any, power to prevent Trump from pursuing a deal. Democrats argue GOP hawks have the ability to use the aforementioned funding mechanisms to steer policy choices. This is especially relevant as Trump tries to dismantle foreign aid programs.

Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who are aligned on Ukraine, visited Kyiv last week and saw the impact of the various funding freezes up close. Shaheen said these cuts are “empowering our adversaries who are all too eager to fill the void we leave behind.” Tillis, however, has been focusing on other elements of the trip.

The bipartisan duo met with the Chair of Ukraine’s parliament, Ruslan Stefanchuk, who told them there should be “no peace at any price” — in other words, the U.S. shouldn’t rush a peace deal that doesn’t benefit Ukraine. Tillis said he agreed with Stefanchuk.

“I hope those who are at the negotiating table are not using [Trump’s] rhetoric,” Tillis said of Trump’s criticisms of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and refusal to label Russia the aggressor. “That’s not a good trajectory for a lasting peace for Ukraine. That’s all I care about — and always stipulating that Putin is a thug and a murderer.”

But the events of the past few weeks have shown that, in the Senate, Schmitt’s camp of younger, more-recently elected GOP senators now has the upper hand over more traditional Republicans. Schmitt delivered this message on Trump’s behalf earlier this month at the Munich Security Conference, which Tillis and Wicker also attended.

While Schmitt sees an opportunity to end the war in Ukraine and re-orient U.S. resources toward the Pacific, Tillis and Wicker are warning of a surrender to Vladimir Putin, whom both men have relentlessly excoriated in response to Trump’s musings.

Hegseth watch: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has made life difficult for Republicans like Wicker. This ranges from incendiary comments about NATO and Ukraine to firings of senior military leaders.

For now, though, Republicans are going along with Hegseth’s directive for an 8% Pentagon spending cut. This isn’t unusual for a new administration and wouldn’t necessarily negate Wicker’s push for a higher topline. Wicker declined to speak with us Wednesday.

But GOP leaders are keeping a close eye on what could get scrapped.

“I’m not exactly sure where the 8% number or argument is coming from or what it applies to, but certainly we’re heading in our own direction, let’s put it that way,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune told us.

— Andrew Desiderio

Rosen, Husted and Ricketts launch effort to ban DeepSeek on government devices

News: Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Jon Husted (R-Ohio) and Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.) are introducing a bill to ban Chinese AI platform DeepSeek on government devices.

The bill, titled the ‘‘No DeepSeek on Government Devices Act,” would empower OMB Director Russ Vought to remove the application from government information systems.

The bipartisan effort reflects the growing fear in Washington that the increased popularity of DeepSeek as an AI alternative could pose national security threats. The company behind the Chinese algorithm described its cost of development as a fraction of comparable U.S. systems, but DeepSeek also adheres to Chinese censorship.

Capitol Hill largely assumes the claims from DeepSeek vastly understate the model’s true cost.

The bipartisan trio shares the concerns of many experts that DeepSeek collects data on its users and distributes it to the Chinese Communist Party and associated intelligence agencies.

Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) and Darin LaHood (R-Ill.) have introduced a House version of the DeepSeek bill.

The push to ban DeepSeek comes after lawmakers successfully banned TikTok, another Chinese-associated technology platform, from government devices.

Other top senators are taking notice of DeepSeek’s potential dangers. Last week, Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) called on Vought to ban the use of DeepSeek and other Chinese-developed AI tools in government agencies. OMB and the Intelligence panel have been in talks on the issues, we’ve learned.

— Max Cohen and Ben Brody

REPORT CARD

The rising Hill Democratic stars

After suffering serious electoral setbacks and a vacuum of leadership, the Democratic Party is in desperate need of some star power. With no clear national figurehead emerging to steer the party from the political wilderness, many are looking to up-and-coming stars in Congress to chart a path forward.

We spoke with more than a dozen Democratic sources and strategists about who they see as fresh talent with leadership potential. Here are the names that came up the most.

In the Senate: Newly elected Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) is earning plaudits for his relentless focus on economic issues. In a recent social media video, Gallego employs a walk-and-talk approach and a tiny mic to run through what President Donald Trump could do to bring egg prices down.

Gallego, a former House member who won in a state that Trump also carried, brings an injection of youth to the Senate Democratic Caucus.

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), who’s seen as a contender to be Democratic leader one day, announced this month that he’s placing a hold on Trump’s foreign policy nominations. At a time when many Democrats are pleading with their elected officials to “do something,” Schatz stepped up.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), another Democrat with higher aspirations, immediately called on the party to embrace populism following their 2024 setbacks. Murphy’s messaging guidance looks awfully similar to the anti-billionaire tact that leadership is employing now.

In the House: Media-savvy up-and-comers Reps. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) and Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.) are known for going viral online.

Crockett and Garcia are mainstays on the cable news networks and effectively use social media to rile up the Democratic base. Frost, the youngest member of Congress, is currently a co-chair of the House Democrats’ messaging arm.

All three are also members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which makes them heroes among party activists and outside groups.

But a number of moderate contenders, like Frontline Reps. Angie Craig (D-Minn.) and Pat Ryan (D-N.Y.) are also making waves.

Craig, who has outperformed national Democrats in rural areas, recently ousted longtime Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.) to become the top Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee and is weighing a Senate run.

Ryan posted one of the largest overperformances on former Vice President Kamala Harris’ vote share in November, outrunning the top of the ticket by roughly 12 points. The combat Army veteran is also making the case on how Democrats can win over male voters.

Reps. Jared Golden (D-Maine) and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-Wash.) are revamping the Blue Dogs’ image and appealing to voters looking for pro-worker populism.

— Mica Soellner and Max Cohen

LAUNCHING TODAY

The Ones to Watch: Advancing with AI

Our latest editorial special project is launching this morning with a focus on how artificial intelligence is helping advance different sectors across the U.S. economy as well as the federal and state governments.

Over the next few weeks, the four-part series — in partnership with Google — will examine the intersection between AI and energy innovation, cybersecurity, the workforce and economic investment.

Each segment will feature an interview with a key public official leading on the issue, and an accompanying podcast.

Our first feature explores the two-sided relationship between AI and energy innovation. AI computations and data storage use up a lot of electricity and its increased proliferation will raise global power demand.

Despite its high appetite for electricity, AI also holds a lot of promise for boosting energy innovation and efficiency. Read more about it here and hear from Gov. Glenn Younkin (R-Va.) on how his state is approaching the issue.

— Elvina Nawaguna

MOMENTS

CLIPS