The US Congress appears on track to avert another federal government shutdown later this month, as Republicans and Democrats move closer to compromise funding bills that would blunt some of the deepest spending cuts sought by President Donald Trump’s administration.
The emerging agreement, ahead of a January 30 funding deadline, would spare Washington a repeat of the politically and economically damaging 2025 shutdown, which disrupted federal services and data systems for a record 43 days. Lawmakers from both parties say momentum is building toward a deal that restores Congress’s authority over federal spending while avoiding the brinkmanship that has increasingly defined recent budget battles.
The bipartisan cooperation marks a sharp reversal from late last year, when Democrats twice blocked stopgap funding bills in October and November in an unsuccessful effort to extract policy concessions, including an extension of Affordable Care Act subsidies. Those subsidies have since expired and show little sign of revival, and party leaders now say they will not risk another shutdown to resurrect them.
“We are not going to shut down,” said Rosa DeLauro, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, in a clear signal that negotiations are aimed at completion rather than confrontation.
Her Republican counterpart, House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole, struck a similarly optimistic note. “Clearly everybody is trying to get there,” he said. “I feel good about where we are at.”
Most federal agencies are currently funded under a temporary measure that expires January 30. Even if talks were to falter briefly, lawmakers say any disruption would be far less severe than the prolonged shutdown that ended only months ago, in part because Congress has already passed several full-year funding bills.
Since December, the House has enacted three of the 12 annual appropriations bills and has advanced five more this month with strong bipartisan majorities. A final package covering the remaining four bills is expected to be released next week. The Senate has already passed six of the measures approved by the House, further narrowing the scope of unresolved issues.
Senator Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said the compromises were necessary to reassert Congress’s constitutional role over the federal purse strings, amid concerns that the White House budget office has sought to exert outsized influence.
“You don’t win anything if you take your ball and go home,” Murray said, arguing that engagement — even with an ideologically opposed administration — was essential to protecting Democratic priorities.
The biggest unresolved flashpoint centers on funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), particularly Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Progressive Democrats have intensified their criticism of immigration raids conducted under Trump’s orders, especially after unrest in cities such as Minneapolis and reports of aggressive enforcement actions.
Anger peaked after the fatal shooting of Renee Good, a US citizen activist in Minnesota, during an ICE operation. The administration has said the officer acted in self-defense, but Democrats argue the response was excessive and emblematic of broader abuses.
Despite the outrage, lawmakers from both parties say a shutdown over DHS funding is highly unlikely. Progressive Democrats have privately and publicly acknowledged they are not prepared to force a government closure to achieve limits on immigration enforcement.
While many progressives are expected to vote against new DHS funding, Senate moderates are widely seen as having enough votes to advance a bill and overcome any filibuster attempt. If negotiations stall, lawmakers say a fallback option would be to place DHS under a short-term funding extension that maintains current spending levels.
“We are not going to solve this problem, but we can constrain some of the illegality,” said Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, a lead Democratic negotiator on DHS funding.
Murphy and other Democrats are pushing for policy conditions rather than outright cuts. Their proposals include requiring body cameras for ICE agents, banning the use of masks during patrols, prohibiting warrantless searches, and barring enforcement actions at schools and houses of worship. They also want to limit DHS’s ability to shift funds from other accounts to finance expanded raids.
Democratic leaders, however, are carefully avoiding the slogan “defund ICE,” which proved politically damaging in past election cycles. Instead, they are emphasizing opposition to funding increases, particularly after Trump’s recently enacted tax bill included a $175 billion infusion for border and immigration enforcement — a sum that dwarfs any near-term appropriations adjustments.
House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark said Friday that Democrats have warned Republicans they may need to pass DHS funding without Democratic votes if restrictions on ICE are not included. “We’ve made clear where we stand,” she said in a television interview, adding that talks were expected to continue through the weekend.
Some progressives argue the party should take a harder line, especially with November midterm elections looming. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York said public anger over immigration enforcement demanded a stronger response.
“I certainly don’t think that we should support expanded funding, and I will not vote for expanded funding,” she said.
Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington echoed that sentiment, framing the current debate as groundwork for potential cuts if Democrats regain control of the House. “It’s about preparing the road for that moment,” she said.
Beyond DHS, the spending bills advancing through Congress largely reject the steep domestic cuts proposed by Trump. While agencies such as the Internal Revenue Service and Environmental Protection Agency will see reductions, they are far smaller than the administration requested. Funding for the National Science Foundation, NASA’s science programs, and the Army Corps of Engineers has been preserved, and the State Department’s budget exceeds Trump’s proposal by $19 billion.
Republicans insist the package still represents fiscal restraint. Cole noted that overall discretionary spending in 2026 would be lower than in 2025.
Democrats remain wary that the administration could attempt to withhold funds, but say passing the bills would strengthen legal challenges against any such moves. The measures also continue funding for foreign aid, arts, democracy promotion, and weather and census data — areas the administration sought to eliminate.
Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii said the agreement reflects a return to long-standing bipartisan consensus. “Foreign aid is a relatively cheap way to project power abroad,” he said. “We lost that for about six months, but we’re putting the band back together.”
