Us House Passes Bipartisan Bill to Avoid Government Shutdown

In a dramatic turn of events, the U.S. House of Representatives successfully passed a stopgap funding bill with substantial Democratic support. This development came after Republican Speaker Kevin McCarthy abandoned earlier demands by party hardliners for a strictly partisan bill. As the countdown to a potential government shutdown loomed, this decision carried significant implications for both parties.

McCarthy’s Change of Heart

The initial standoff revolved around the insistence of party hardliners that any funding bill should garner support exclusively from Republican members. This rigid stance risked pushing the nation into its fourth partial shutdown in a decade. McCarthy, however, made a crucial shift by retracting his support for this approach, thereby avoiding a potential leadership challenge from far-right members within his party.

Bipartisan Passage in the House

In a notable show of support, the House voted 335-91 in favor of funding the government for an additional 45 days. Notably, a greater number of Democrats than Republicans backed the bill, marking a shift from earlier expectations. If approved by the Democratic-majority Senate and signed into law by President Joe Biden, this measure would extend government funding by 45 days.

Democrats Declare Victory

With 209 Democrats rallying behind the bill, the majority party celebrated what they deemed a significant win. Representative Hakeem Jeffries, a prominent House Democrat, expressed his satisfaction, declaring that “Extreme MAGA Republicans have lost, the American people have won.” Representative Don Beyer echoed these sentiments, relieved that Speaker McCarthy’s change of heart had allowed for a last-minute bipartisan vote.

Mitch McConnell’s Position

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who had previously supported a similar Senate measure with broad bipartisan backing, shifted his stance in light of the House version. Despite his desire to avoid a government shutdown, McConnell recommended a ‘no’ vote. This difference in opinion highlighted the evolving dynamics of the political situation.