Both Parties Decry Shutdowns, Yet Exploit Them for Political Leverage/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ For decades, U.S. politicians have condemned government shutdowns as reckless—only to use them as bargaining chips when convenient. The latest closure highlights both parties’ shifting stances: Democrats now reject short-term bills they once demanded, while Republicans refuse negotiations they once insisted on. The result: a cycle of shutdown hypocrisy.
Shutdown Hypocrisy Quick Looks
- 2013 Trump vs. 2025 Trump: once urged compromise, now exploits shutdown
- Schumer’s reversal: once called shutdowns reckless, now backs one over ACA subsidies
- JD Vance’s flip-flop: once endorsed shutdown leverage, now calls it unreasonable
- Elizabeth Warren shift: 2013 urged temporary funding, 2025 votes against it
- Past shutdowns: GOP tried to defund Obamacare (2013), Dems fought for Dreamers (2018), Trump demanded border wall money (2019)
- Shutdown outcomes: instigating party almost never wins major concessions
- Current fight: Democrats demand ACA subsidy extension, Medicaid cut reversal
- Experts say shutdowns recur because voters rarely punish either side
- Bipartisan hypocrisy: both parties use shutdowns as political messaging platforms
- White House stance: insists Democrats want “free health care for illegal aliens”
Both Parties Decry Shutdowns, Yet Exploit Them for Political Leverage
Deep Look
WASHINGTON — The U.S. government is shut down again, and if history is any guide, the cycle of blame, political maneuvering, and rhetorical reversals will repeat itself. In Washington, leaders from both parties consistently condemn shutdowns as damaging—until they discover their usefulness as tools of leverage.
Trump’s Past vs. Present
In 2013, Donald Trump—then a businessman outside politics—criticized Washington dysfunction, urging lawmakers to “get people in a room and make deals for the good of the country.” Now, as president, Trump and his Republican allies are refusing to negotiate, insisting Democrats forced the shutdown by demanding health care subsidies.
The shift mirrors Trump’s past behavior as well. During his first term, he presided over the longest shutdown in U.S. history (35 days) while fighting for border wall funding, declaring he would personally “own” the closure.
Schumer’s Shift
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer has his own reversals. In 2024, he blasted Republicans for threatening shutdowns, calling it “amazing” that anyone would believe closures were legitimate bargaining tactics. Yet today, Schumer and his caucus are rejecting GOP bills unless they restore Affordable Care Act subsidies and undo Medicaid cuts.
Democrats argue this isn’t hypocrisy but necessity: “We’re not asking for new spending—we’re asking Republicans to stop raising costs on Americans,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren said, even as she voted against the kind of short-term funding bill she once championed.
JD Vance’s Flip-Flop
Vice President JD Vance provides another stark example. As a senator in 2024, he argued shutdowns should be used to “get something out of it that’s good for the American people.” A year later, standing at the White House podium, Vance declared it “unreasonable” for Democrats to hold the government hostage for their demands.
A Pattern of Shutdown Politics
The inconsistency isn’t new.
- 2013: Republicans, led by Sen. Ted Cruz, shut down the government for 16 days over Obamacare funding. They failed to kill the law.
- 2018: Democrats forced a three-day shutdown demanding protections for Dreamers. They got only a symbolic vote.
- 2019: Trump triggered a 35-day partial shutdown for border wall funds, ultimately bypassing Congress with an emergency declaration.
The lesson? Shutdowns rarely achieve their policy goals. The Affordable Care Act remained intact, Dreamer protections never materialized, and Trump’s wall required extraordinary workarounds. Experts warn Democrats today may face the same fate: their demand to extend ACA subsidies may not survive the standoff.
Why Shutdowns Keep Happening
Michael Thorning of the Bipartisan Policy Center argues both parties now view shutdowns as low-risk tactics because voters rarely punish them. “There’s no clear pattern of accountability,” Thorning said. “That has probably reduced the riskiness of what was once seen as a dangerous tactic.”
Shutdowns have become political messaging platforms rather than policy tools. They allow parties to spotlight issues—health care, immigration, border security—without necessarily expecting legislative victories.
White House Message vs. Democratic Push
The Trump administration has aggressively framed the closure as Democrats prioritizing “free health care for illegal aliens,” with spokeswoman Abigail Jackson dismissing Democratic criticism as distraction. Democrats counter that they are protecting working families from skyrocketing insurance premiums.
Schumer’s office circulated Trump’s 2013 comments about compromise as proof of the president’s hypocrisy.
The White House dismissed it as political spin: “They’re making the AP write stories on week-old Instagram posts,” Jackson quipped.
A Shutdown of Convenience
Ultimately, Washington’s enduring contradiction is clear: shutdowns are universally decried in theory but routinely deployed in practice. Each party claims moral high ground, accusing the other of reckless hostage-taking, even as both have used the same tactic when convenient.
And as long as neither side faces consistent punishment from voters, shutdowns are likely to remain a recurring feature of U.S. politics—hated, denounced, and weaponized all at once.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.