Republicans Could End the Shutdown But They’re Choosing Blame Over Action

As the government teeters on the brink of a shutdown, all eyes are on Republicans in Congress. House Republicans have already passed a clean continuing resolution (CR) to keep the government funded, yet the Senate has failed to act. Time is running out, and the consequences of inaction will be immediate: furloughed or fired federal employees, disrupted services, and economic ripple effects across the country.

Yet the irony is stark. Republicans could prevent the shutdown. They have the power to change the Senate rules, just as they did 11 days ago when they confirmed 48 Trump appointees in a single vote by bending precedent. A simple majority in the Senate would allow them to pass the CR without Democratic support. The procedural tools are there; the political will, apparently, is not.

Instead, Republicans are betting on a narrative: that they can blame Democrats for the shutdown. They claim that a CR passed in the House is being blocked by Senate Democrats. But history and public perception suggest otherwise. The party in control of the House — the chamber with the “power of the purse” — typically bears the brunt of public anger when the government stops functioning.

Moreover, the precedent-setting moves Republicans have already made — fast-tracking nominations and overriding long-standing Senate norms — make it clear they know how to bend the rules when it suits them. Choosing not to do the same to pass a CR exposes a political calculation: a preference for theater over governance, blame over action.

The reality is unavoidable: if the government shuts down tomorrow, Republicans will own it. Furloughed employees, delayed services, and economic disruption will all be blamed on them, regardless of the procedural excuses they offer. Unlike nominations, the public does not parse Senate rules. All they see is a government frozen in dysfunction while the party in charge refuses to act.

If Republicans truly cared about governing, they would follow the path they’ve already shown they are capable of: change the rules, pass the CR, and keep the government running. Choosing not to act is not prudence — it is a calculated gamble on blame that, historically, has not paid off.