In a stunning political game of high-stakes strategy, the once-improbable scenario of Democrats riding to the rescue of Speaker Kevin McCarthy is swiftly becoming a reality.
Behind closed doors, small groups of centrist Democrats are orchestrating clandestine meetings with some of McCarthy’s closest GOP allies. Their mission: to forge a last-minute pact that could stave off a looming government shutdown, a crisis born from the intransigence of a handful of conservative hardliners.
These covert negotiations, involving lawmakers primarily from the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, the Republican Governance Group, and the centrist New Democrat Coalition, have been shrouded in secrecy. Republicans engaged in these discussions are deeply concerned about revealing their backup plan, opting to unveil it only when all other options in McCarthy’s arsenal have faltered.
The pivotal moment for this daring gambit may not arrive until the eleventh hour, just ahead of the September 30 shutdown deadline.
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) emphasized the need for a bipartisan solution to the impending shutdown crisis, asserting, “It’s got to be bipartisan anyway, at some point. So why negotiate with these five or 10 people who move the goalposts?”
The bipartisan cohort is honing in on two key strategies: the first involves a procedural maneuver to force a vote on a compromise spending plan, while the second aims to craft a bill so universally popular that McCarthy can navigate it through Congress, sidestepping challenges from the right. This bill would likely take the form of a bipartisan short-term patch, encompassing elements like disaster relief, Ukraine aid, and modest border policies.
The Problem Solvers Caucus has begun presenting their framework to members, planning a formal vote to endorse it. Another group, which includes top aides from the New Democrat Coalition and Republican Governance Group, convened to explore their own stopgap funding proposal.
However, beneath the surface of this spending crisis lies another pressing concern for Speaker McCarthy. Democrats are quietly contemplating assisting him with both issues—averting a government shutdown and safeguarding his position as Speaker. Naturally, these endeavors come with certain conditions, and the influential House Democratic Caucus Chair, Hakeem Jeffries, plays a pivotal role in shaping the Democrats’ strategy.
Although any plan conceived by these rank-and-file members faces significant obstacles before it can be put to a vote, the McCarthy-bailout discussions are gaining momentum as his conservative adversaries continue to derail his GOP-exclusive spending patch.
Even if the Speaker manages to resurrect his proposal, Republicans have long recognized that it won’t secure passage in the Senate. Sooner or later, they’ll need to collaborate with Democrats.
The exact demands made by Democrats for their cooperation remain uncertain, with the ultimate decision resting on Jeffries, who has refrained from revealing his stance on a potential bipartisan compromise.
In the backdrop of these deliberations looms the specter of a discharge petition—an extraordinary maneuver that would force a bill to the House floor. While it has a limited 30-day window, it could scarcely prevent a shutdown just 11 days away. Some Republicans are increasingly considering this option, demonstrating their waning patience with the conservative blockade.
Yet, there are risks involved in these bipartisan negotiations for both parties. Some conservatives warn of potential political backlash from their base voters, given that the Democrats they are collaborating with aim to defeat them in the next election.
The greatest risk of all, however, lies with Speaker McCarthy himself. Advancing a bipartisan deal would cross a red line that his most vocal adversaries have pledged to trigger—a vote to strip his Speakership. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) has publicly vowed to force such a vote if McCarthy introduces a “clean” funding bill.
As the high-stakes political maneuvering unfolds, Bacon implored the Speaker to stand resolute: “We should ignore it. You can’t kowtow to that.”
