CSPAN - Government Shutdown Update

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 2, 2025 01:20-02:55 - CSPAN

01:34:57

Government Shutdown Update

Participants

Main

peter slen

cspan 20:20

suhas subramanyam

rep/d 05:56

Appearances

donald j trump

admin 01:13

jd vance

admin 01:07

karoline leavitt

admin 00:36

mike flood

rep/r 00:38

Clips

dasha burns

politico 00:05

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Making it easy for you with our 2025 Congressional Directory.
		Get essential contact information for government officials all in one place.
		This compact, spiral-bound guide contains bio and contact information for every House and Senate member of the 119th Congress.
		Contact information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors.
		The Congressional Directory costs $32.95 plus shipping and handling, and every purchase helps support C-SPAN's nonprofit operations.
		Scan the code on the right or go to c-spanshop.org to order your copy today.
		On the first day of the government shutdown, the Senate again failed to advance funding proposals from both the Democrats and the Republicans.
		The GOP measure without health care subsidies failed, but did have some Democratic support.
		The Senate will be in session on Thursday, but no votes are scheduled until Friday.
		The House is not expected to work on funding legislation this week.
		Meanwhile, the White House has threatened a mass layoff of federal workers if the shutdown continues instead of short-term furloughs.
		You can continue following coverage of the shutdown across the C-SPAN networks on the C-SPAN Now app or online at C-SPAN.org.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		20 hours into the latest government shutdown, and the Republicans and Democrats have not reached a solution to reopening parts of the federal government, including the Washington Monument and the Statue of Liberty.
		The House passed a seven-week clean extension two weeks ago.
		It's now up to the Senate.
		But so far, both a Republican plan and a Democratic plan have failed to get the 60 votes necessary for passage.
		Now, the Democrats have raised three issues they say must be addressed before the government can reopen.
		They want to look at the soon-to-expire Affordable Care Act subsidies.
		They want to look at future cuts to Medicaid, and they want assurances about further rescissions.
		Well, this is the fourth government shutdown under President Trump during his two administrations, the most of any U.S. president.
		The longest shutdown in history happened in 2018 to 2019, 35 days, and it spanned two Congresses, the 115th and the 116th.
		Both Presidents Obama and Biden also experienced a shutdown, 16 days during the Obama administration, less than a day during Joe Biden's term.
		And since 1980, this is the 21st lapse of funding or government shutdown.
		Well, tonight, we hope to put this shutdown in historical context, help to explain why it happened, and look at prognosis for when the government may reopen.
		We're pleased to have Katie Edmondson of the New York Times with us, along with Eric Wasson of Bloomberg.
		Eric Wasson, 21st time since 1980, when did shutting down the government become a political cudgel?
unidentified		You know, it seems to be getting worse and worse.
		You know, the appropriations process in Congress has really broken.
		I think it's been since the mid-1990s when all the appropriations bills were passed on time.
		It's become really dysfunctional in Congress.
		And I think we're seeing that both sides become more and more polarized.
		So we have seen, you know, famously a big shutdown during Bill Clinton that sort of like redounded against Republicans and benefited the president.
		We saw under Obama, but here again, we are again in a shutdown posture.
		And I think it's just a symptom of the polarization of the parties and an inability to really strike bipartisan deals on major issues.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Katie Edmondson, four times during the two Trump administrations.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Should we read anything into that?
unidentified		Well, I think, and I think this is very much reflected in the particular shutdown that we find right now, is that Democrats feel under a Trump administration, under a Republican-led Congress, that they have fewer and fewer avenues through which to protest his policies, to which to throw up opposition to his policies.
unidentified		That's one of the things that I think Eric and I have been hearing from Democrats on the Hill in the last couple of weeks is that a shutdown is one of their only sort of points of leverage at this point and that they feel that things have gotten so out of hand that the White House is moving so aggressively that this is one of the means of last resort for them to show their base in particular that they are in fact trying to put up a fight against his policies.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Mr. Watson, what's the Republican position?
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		The House passed this two weeks ago.
unidentified		Yeah, they feel like they have the upper hand.
		You know, there's what they call a clean, you know, seven-week government funding bill through the November 21st.
		Usually in these shutdown showdowns, it's the group that's asking for something extra.
		You know, we saw in the 2013, the Ted Cruz shutdown, as we like to think of it, they were asking for the repeal of Obamacare.
		And that extra ask sort of led the blame to fall on Republicans.
		During the Trump long 35-day shutdown, it was really the president asking for border wall funds that were sort of anathema to Democrats, and he sort of lost that in the end and had to give up.
		Now it's really Democrats who are asking for, most notably, the Affordable Care Act subsidies extension, but also a long litany of changes, totaling $1.5 trillion in new spending.
		Part of that's because they would reverse about a $1 trillion cut to Medicaid funding and the $350 billion Affordable Care Act.
		But there are also elements that are in there that are very controversial, including one that's hotly disputed related to the health care coverage for undocumented immigrants.
		Because they put so much in their ask, that is sort of creating a blame game that probably is going to hurt Democrats.
		My suspicion is more than Republican.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Do you agree with that, Katie Edmonds?
unidentified		I mean, I think it's really hard to game this out, particularly because we don't have a sense of how long this shutdown is going to last.
		I do think as a shutdown drags out, the variables start to change.
		I think there is maybe a recognition at some point among voters that they look to the president, regardless of who is in the White House, to adjudicate this, to say, all right, we're suffering enough here.
		Let's have the paychecks go out.
		Somebody do something.
		And so I do think that at the beginning, it is a tougher argument for Democrats to land for all of the reasons that Eric just laid out.
		I do think that messaging can start to get muddled just the longer a shutdown plays out.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		So what is a logical compromise that maybe is being talked about up on the Hill?
unidentified		I think there would be potentially a clear deal if Republican and Democratic leaderships, if they wanted to take it, which is something in the realm of extending those Obamacare subsidies.
unidentified		This is a policy that...
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		As part of the extension?
unidentified		Either as part of the extension or you could have some sort of handshake deal by which Democrats say, all right, we will agree to vote to reopen the government, but you have to promise us that later we are going to have some sort of deal in principle on extending those subsidies.
		I think we saw already today on the Senate floor a bipartisan group of senators trying to feel each other out, trying to see where exactly everyone feels comfortable landing on this.
		That being said, right now it is the stance of Senate Republican leaders that we're not going to give you anything.
		We're not going to negotiate.
		We're not going to let you take government funding hostage.
		So we'll have to see again how open Senate leaders are and how open President Trump is to a compromise.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, Eric Wasson, this really is a Senate story at this point, isn't it?
unidentified		It is.
		And we saw this gang sort of forming.
		We've seen this before where we call them gangs, but groups of moderate Senate Republicans and Democrats getting together, trying to feel each other out for a possible solution.
		There's talk of a shorter-term stopgap, possibly paired with more than just a promise to talk about Obamacare subsidies, but maybe a guaranteed vote.
		I was just talking to several Democratic senators before coming over here.
		They were feeling that they could get John Thune, the Senate majority leader, to agree to a vote, but the problem is in the House.
		Speaker Johnson appears reluctant to sort of bring that up.
		They have what's become known as the Hastert rule, which is they don't want to put something on the House floor that can't get a majority of the support of the majority party.
		There are a lot of Republicans who are against Obamacare conceptually, generally, and specifically the specific subsidies being extended.
		We only see about 12 or I think maybe up to 14 Republicans signed on to a one-year extension.
		That's a tiny, tiny group in the overall Republican conference.
		There would have to be a real push from the White House.
		I think that the gambit by Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leaders, to get Trump to sort of agree that this is politically a viable and perhaps popular thing to do to extend it and to push Republicans in the House to accept it.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Well, if they did promise a vote on extending the subsidies, 212 Democrats plus 10 to 15 Republicans, it would pass, wouldn't it, in the House?
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		So, I mean, if they did the promise for the vote.
unidentified		Right, but it would violate the general ethos of House Republican leadership that you could only bring things that are popular or at least have a majority support among Republicans themselves.
		So, you know, there have been a few instances in my time covering Congress when the Speaker would just sort of give a week and not allow a discharge petition to go forward.
		This is a mechanism to force a vote.
		This happened with the Export-Import Bank that most Republicans were not hoping to extend, but there were enough pro-trade, you know, agricultural Republicans, and a discharge petition was basically allowed to go forward.
		And my recollection is that, you know, that ended up succeeding with mostly Democratic votes.
		But that is still the exception rather than the rule.
		There's a general feeling if you're the Speaker, you need to represent the majority of the majority party.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		So in the meantime, the Senate is out because of the Jewish holiday.
		They're back on Friday.
		Will they be taking votes again on a continuing resolution on Friday?
unidentified		Our understanding is it will be more of the same.
		This is sort of the beatings will continue until morale improves situation where Republican leaders want to force Democrats to go on the record again and again voting against that stopgap spending bill that's already passed the House.
		I think in the meantime, what we'll be trying to figure out on Friday, it seems there could even be votes into the weekend.
		We'll be trying to figure out how much anxiety there is among Democratic senators in particular.
		Do they want to bring this shutdown to a quick close or are they hearing an appetite from their voters to keep up the fight?
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Is there a path to moral victory for both the Republicans and the Democrats to reopen this thing, to reopen the government?
unidentified		That's a question.
		Moral victory.
		I don't really know.
		I mean, I feel like there is a path to potential compromise, you know, sort of surrounded around the Obamacare subsidies.
		You know, I think will Democrats likely full.
		I think we're seeing that start already.
		Cortez Masto from Nevada and Angus King, the independent from Maine, are already voting for the Republican.
		This is the beginning of a potential jailbreak.
		It shows that the Democrats are feeling the pressure.
		So it's a real challenge for Chuck Schumer in particular to hold everybody together.
		In the end of the day, I think there is going to be some kind of something way short of the $1.5 trillion Democratic counterproposal that is talked about.
		And those moderate Democrats go in and say, we're going to vote to reopen the government.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		So when it comes to shutting down the government, mandatory versus discretionary spending, are they both impacted?
unidentified		Well, I think we're mostly seeing sort of some of the federal services be impacted in terms of federal employees being furloughed, right, federal employees in some cases being asked to come into work and come into work, continue working without receiving a paycheck, right?
		I think some of the issues that we've seen in the past for longer shutdowns, and again, the last shutdown that we had in 2018 and 2019, that was a partial shutdown.
		So people didn't really feel the full ramifications of a full shutdown.
		I think potentially you could see issues in sort of how essential services, you mentioned mandatory spending, things like Medicare.
		You could see potentially issues in how they're getting sent out to people.
		But in theory, right, that is spending that is going to continue being dispersed to people.
		Right.
		Unless you're maybe a new enrollee, you know, if you have Social Security Administration or CMS unable to actually process new applications, people who are just retiring, for example, that could be suspended, your passports, et cetera.
		I would say that the White House Budget Office has a lot of discretion, and we're really seeing them stretch the limits of that throughout this administration.
		So we don't have a full clear picture of exactly what they're going to deem essential and non-essential, and what exactly they mean by mass firings.
		This is a legally contested issue, but Rust Vot did say to the House Republicans that in one or two days we're going to see RIFs reduction in force.
		We don't know yet the scope of that or really the legality of that.
		But we do also know that he had already been planning October rifts, reduction in force in the Interior Department and elsewhere.
		So it remains to be seen.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Well, we want to get our viewers involved as well.
		We're talking about the government shutdown.
		We're about 20 hours and 12 minutes into this year's shutdown.
		Here are the numbers.
		Here's how you can participate.
		202 is the area code for all of our numbers.
		748-8001 for Republicans.
		748-8000 for Democrats.
		Independents, 748-8002.
		Social media, just remember at C-SPAN4X or Facebook, and you can make a comment there as well.
		We'll begin taking those calls in just a minute.
		We encourage our federal government viewers as well to call in and identify yourselves as federal government employees.
		We'd love to hear your perspective as well.
		Eric Gwasson, how long have you been covering the Hill?
unidentified		Since 2007.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		When's the last time the Congress passed an annual budget?
unidentified		Well, you know, we do these omnibus bills, which is not the way you're supposed to do 12 individual appropriations bills.
		My understanding is in 1996, they did all 12, you know, on time.
		But, you know, we did have, right now we've been operating under what's called a continuing resolution since March.
		This is the third one in a row.
		You know, the entire fiscal year for 2025 was funded just as a basic continuation of what was a March 2024 omnibus spending bill.
		So that was the last time we had a full fleshed out appropriations bill.
		So it's been kind of been riding on autopilot for quite a while.
		And I think, you know, especially with Republicans now in charge of the White House and both houses of Congress, they want to do full appropriations bills.
		There's one piece of that, we call a mini-bus.
		It's the agricultural bill, the legislative branch and the veterans affairs.
		That could be ready for prime time within weeks.
		I hear that, especially on the agriculture bill, there's basically agreement.
		So they're going to try to do this in pieces.
		This is a chance to update programs, to update earmarks, which are of interest even to the Freedom Caucus.
		We could talk about that at some point.
		It used to be that House Conservatives were really opposed to congressionally directed projects known as earmarks.
		They do want to have that, you know, the ability to have bridges and libraries and other things that they designate in their district.
		You know, that could go forward.
		But it's going to be a long road, I think, to get a final appropriations bill, especially because of controversial issues like impoundment.
		We can't actually have this conversation about the shutdown without that issue.
		The White House Budget Office has really been stretching the ability of the executive branch to cancel congressionally approved spending.
		And one of the asks for the Democrats doesn't get as much attention as the health care issues: is this a potential to abolish or forbid both impoundments and what are known as pocket rescues?
		The Supreme Court, in a kind of controversial preliminary decision, green-lit pocket rescissions, the ability of the administration to just request a cancellation of funding, in this case, $5 billion in foreign aid, just short, just before the end of the fiscal year, and when Congress doesn't act to just cancel it.
		You know, there are many people, budget experts on both Republican and Democratic side, who said this is probably not really intended or to be allowed.
		You know, the congressional general accounting office has said this is not allowed, but they've nonetheless gone forward.
		And the Supreme Court seems to be green lighting this.
		And this is going to make it very hard to get a final appropriations deal because Democrats are saying, why would we agree to specific numbers, specific programs, and then you go and cancel all of our priorities while keeping yours?
		So this classic trade-off of domestic policy programs like the Labor H bill, Labor Health and Human Services, and defense doesn't make a lot of sense in that environment.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Katie Edmondson, how much attention do you spend to committee chairs, to the appropriations chairs?
		They used to be called cardinals in the system because they were so powerful.
		It's really faded, hasn't it?
		The system is, the budget system is kind of broken down.
unidentified		It's right, and it's because, as Eric just talked about, we really have coasted from continuing resolution to continuing resolution.
		And I think it's quite dispiriting as well if you are a rank-and-file member of Congress.
		In particular, you talked about people not liking CRs.
		The Freedom Caucus, the hard-right flank of the House Republican conference, for a long time said that they would not lend their votes to a CR, that they did not want to do one up or down vote on a bill that just extended spending.
		They wanted to cut spending.
		They gave former Speaker Kevin McCarthy a lot of grief for they ousted him for putting forward a continuing resolution that had Democratic votes.
		That being said, now that it's a different president, it's a different tune.
		But I think it's quite dispiriting for a lot of these lawmakers to essentially feel like leadership writes a continuing resolution and they are told the day before, two days before, okay, you have one vote, yes or no, to lodge sort of how you feel about a 500-page bill.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Well, let's give you a sense of what current federal spending is like.
		FY 2025, which ended at midnight on September 30th, the budget was $6.95 trillion.
		Of that, about $3 trillion, 45% of spending was Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
		Mandatory spending was a little over $4 trillion.
		Discretionary, about $1.88 trillion.
		Defense spending, $884 billion.
		Non-defense spending, $995 million.
		There's nearly 3 million federal employees as of August.
		Now, the budget we just showed you was approved by President Biden, and as our guests say, was continued by continuing resolution under President Trump.
		Okay, when it comes to cuts in the federal government because of the shutdown, the EPA Education and Commerce departments are furloughing about 80% of their employees.
		And this comes from the New York Times.
		I think it's Katie Edmondson's reporting.
		Defense is furloughing about 334,000 civilian employees, 45% of their workforce.
		Department of Justice, 12, 13,000 of their 115,000 employees, 11%.
		DHS, the Department of Homeland Security, is furloughing about 5% of its workforce.
		And the VA, about 3% of its 461,000 employees.
		What did those numbers say to you, Katie Edmondson?
unidentified		Well, I think one of the reasons why we saw in March Democrats decide to ultimately let a spending bill advance, why they decided not to shut down the government back in March, was in large part because of the numbers that you just read out.
		They were very worried about the discretion they would give Rust Vote over at the White House budget office to furlough employees to, as Eric alluded to, potentially do mass layoffs, continue to do mass layoffs of employees.
		And so I also think politically this does put Democrats in a slightly uncomfortable position, right, having just defended sort of federal employees back in March.
		They're now making the case that, look, regardless of whether we lend our votes to keep the government funded, Rust Vote is going to do this, whether we like it or not.
		But I think those numbers are going to be difficult for a lot of Democrats, particularly those who represent the district area, Maryland, Virginia, to face.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		And political reporter Anthony Andragna sent out this tweet that vote says that mass firings will begin in a day or two.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Are you hearing the same thing?
unidentified		I mean, that's certainly what they're saying.
		There are legal questions.
		One of the things under a shutdown, it's governed by what's called the Anti-Deficiency Act.
		It means it's actually a criminal offense to spend money for non-essential functions.
		And if you are a federal employee or administration official spending money, you're open to potential prosecution.
		So the question is, can you actually run a mass firing?
		Can you have HR conduct all the necessary procedures and declare it essential?
		You know, this is something that could end up in the courts.
		Of course, at the end of the day, it's the Trump Justice Department.
		The likelihood of anyone in the Trump Justice Department prosecuting anyone for doing this is basically nil.
		But this could end up being challenged if they do try to conduct these, you know, a lot of the issues here have to do with what's called statutory minimums.
		As we saw with USAID, they reduced this agency to what they believe is the statutory minimum.
		They looked in the law and said, okay, these are programs that have to exist, are specifically named everyone else as extraneous.
		Well, do those exist in a shutdown?
		This is something that lawyers will be fighting out if they actually go ahead with the firings.
		But the memo to the agencies did say you would have to restore agencies to statutory minimums after a shutdown.
		So we'll have to see how this plays out.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Let's hear from our viewers, Vicki in Madison, North Carolina, Democrats line.
		Hi, Vicki.
		Good evening.
		Vicki, you with us?
		We are not hearing Vicki.
		Are you guys here, Iger?
		No.
		Nor am I. Let's try Raymond in Miami, Republican.
		Raymond, you're on C-SPAN.
		Please go ahead.
unidentified		Yes, sir.
		Thank you.
		Thank you.
		My point of view is that I would stay with the shutdown due to because we cannot afford that $1.4 trillion for the illegal immigrants area here.
		I mean, when we were taking in 1 million people a year, yes, we can afford that.
		But all we did now when Biden came in office, we hurt the whole country by all this money that was given to these folks.
		And I mean, don't get me wrong, they're human beings, but we have to take care of our own people first.
		I mean, we've got a lot of people on the streets, a lot of people that are military that are hurting.
		But in that last administration, they did nothing for them people, and that hurts.
		But in the same token, I would stand by Trump's guard and a Democrat, I mean a Republican of holing off on that thing and maybe make some type of change to where we can put something in for American people.
		And the people that are here from the aliens that are here that are regular, you know, with the green card and all that, they're already established.
		Help them out.
		But the arrest of them we do have to eliminate.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Thank you, Raymond.
		Let's hear from Vice President Vance today who spoke on this issue.
		Here he is.
jd vance ▲ ● ▼		To the American people who are watching, the reason your government is shut down at this very minute is because despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of congressional Republicans and even a few moderate Democrats supported opening the government, the Chuck Schumer AOC wing of the Democratic Party shut down the government because they said to us, we will open the government, but only if you give billions of dollars of funding for health care for illegal aliens.
		That's a ridiculous proposition.
		Let me say two other quick things, and then again, I'll take some questions.
		Number one, we all understand that Democrats and Republicans have policy disagreements.
		Democrats want to do things.
		Look, when Chuck Schumer and Akeem Jeffries were in here a couple of days ago, they made some suggestions that the president was more than happy to say, yes, let's sit down and talk about how we can solve the health care crisis that we inherited from the Biden administration.
		But it's one thing to say that we should solve the health care crisis for Americans.
		It's another thing to say that we're going to shut down the government unless we give the Democrats every single thing that they want, which, as Caroline says, includes giving billions of dollars of taxpayer funding for health care for illegal migrants.
		That's ridiculous.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Katie Edmondson, what are you hearing from both Raymond the Caller and Vice President Vance?
unidentified		Yeah, and I'm curious to hear Eric's perspective on this as well.
		But from my point of view, sort of the genesis of where this talking point comes from is that when Democrats released their counterproposal, sort of their list of demands, what they needed in order to lend their votes to a spending bill, they targeted the entire health care section of the so-called Big Beautiful Bill, that tax bill that Republicans passed earlier this year.
		And my understanding is the intention was they were targeting the health care section because they wanted to reverse the Medicaid cuts, excuse me, contained in that legislation.
		Now, part of that title also contained some policies that Republicans put forward, trying to make it harder for states like California, I think sometimes New York, who use, who are then reimbursed for emergency funding, emergency spending in emergency rooms on people who are not authorized legally to be here.
		So that is the genesis of this talking point is that Democrats, when they released their counterproposal, just struck that whole section.
		And so I actually do think, I think Raymond was saying, I wish that there could be some sort of happy medium in which we don't allow that to happen, but we can make sure there's health care for Americans.
		And I think there would be a number of moderate Democrats who say that's exactly what we'd like to do as well.
		Yeah, no, I think you pretty much nailed it, Katie.
		You know, the total is about $28 billion of that emergency provision.
		This is basically lowering the federal reimbursement for this.
		But I will add that under the law, hospitals still have to take care of people when they show up.
		So it's not like Vance was talking about, okay, we see a lot of undocumented people at the emergency room.
		They'll still go to the emergency room, but who will pay?
		It will be the hospitals.
		And then uncompensated care will then be distributed in higher health care bills to others.
		So in other words, there is a kernel of truth here.
		The caller talked about $1.4 trillion.
		That's the total Democratic ask.
		Much of most, the vast majority of it is related to American citizens or lawful permanent residents and their health care coverage.
		But the negotiations, as Katie is mentioning, are around Obamacare subsidy extension.
		You know, the fact that it's in or technically in the Democratic counterproposal, that's not where Democrats are really focusing.
		They're focusing on Obamacare and also this impoundment issue that I went on at length about earlier.
		I would not expect, and Mike Johnson, the speaker of the House, said there's zero chance they're going to repeal their big beautiful bill, as they call it.
		Now they've renamed it the Working Families Tax Cut Act.
		But, you know, I think that's not where the deal is anyhow in the end of the day.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		James is calling in from Salem, Oregon, Democrats line.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Hi, James.
unidentified		Hi.
		I would just like to say that I am so disappointed in people who see Bill in the White House and we can't get rid of him.
		He won't go away.
		The 13th Amendment didn't do anything against him.
		So I'm just so disappointed.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		James, do you have any comment regarding the shutdown itself?
unidentified		Yeah, it's just a matter of signing up a paper of the Republicans not wanting people like me and people like other people to get hurt from this shutdown.
unidentified		There's nothing positive going to come out of it.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Thank you, sir.
		Thank you, sir, for calling in.
		Let's hear from Denise in Lincoln, Michigan, Independent line.
		Denise, you with us?
unidentified		Yes, I am.
		I'm very disappointed that all summer long, the Republicans have been on break going down to Mar-a-Logo and enjoying Donald Trump when they should have been working on this with the Democrats.
		I think right now that all the people in the House and the Senate should lose their insurance, lose their pay until they get the work done.
		The problem is they are not working.
		They are not coming up with solutions.
		Right now, people deserve health care.
		And this thing that undocumented people get health care is just bull.
		So what they need to do is go back to work and do their job and stop fawning over the president.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		That's Denise in Michigan.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Eric Wasson, as of today, has anyone lost their health insurance or health care because of the shutdown?
unidentified		Because of the shutdown?
		No, I wouldn't say that's necessarily the case.
		There is this women, infant, and children feeding program that probably has two weeks of funding left, and then we will see real-world impacts on those benefits.
		I will address the issue of going on vacation.
		This is something that Congress has really had the habit of doing.
		There was a long August recess.
		We see repeated House recesses.
		It's become really almost just a bad habit among lawmakers.
		They can only come to a deal at the very last minute under enormous pressure and a deadline.
		And there's almost a resignation that we might as well just go back to our districts.
		You know, that is part of their job, obviously, to talk to their constituents, but to not be in town, not to sort of get to know each other, work out these smaller deals, because there's no point in coming to any sort of brass tax on any kind of agreement until the last minute.
		So here we are.
		Again, we saw that with the House is gone.
		You know, the lawmakers were gone for most of August and some of September.
		So this has become something that the public is really frustrated with.
		They see that their members are not working.
		And I think there's a bit of truth to that.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Katie Edmondson?
unidentified		Well, I would also say, I mean, I was just talking about if you're a rank-and-file member, you feel that you have very little opportunity to get input into this process.
		So if I'm a freshman congresswoman from Green Bay, let's say, and I sit on the Transportation Committee, I don't sit on appropriate.
		From my perspective, right, my leadership is going to unveil some sort of bill that they'll have negotiated with other congressional leaders.
		They're going to tell me when I need to vote for it.
		They're going to tell me how I'm going to vote for it.
		And so I would rather be home in my district talking with my voters who I want to re-elect me in two years.
		And I think, again, we all would prefer for lawmakers to feel that they have a stake in the process to be in the Capitol working, negotiating with each other.
		But I think we talked about the broken appropriations process, and I think this is just another example of that.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Well, Brian Schatz, Democrat Hawaii Senator, spoke today at a press conference sharing some of the Democratic concerns.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Let's listen.
unidentified		In a matter of days, tens of millions of people all across the country are going to get letters in the mail saying your monthly premium starting January 1st is going to be more than double what you pay now.
		More than double.
		And that's not my speculating.
		That's not my allegation.
		That's not a political talking point that was cooked up in some Democratic lab.
		That is what the Kaiser Family Foundation analysis shows that premiums will increase on average by 114% per person.
		Not 14%.
		114%.
		That's just the average.
		Some people's rates will be changed based on their income levels.
		So say you make $35,000 a year.
		You're now going to be paying almost $1,600 more per year for coverage.
		And if you're a family of four making $75,000, you're going to be paying more than $3,000 extra dollars.
		I just encourage everybody who's watching, all of my colleagues, all of the staff, all the members of the media, to talk to anyone in your hometown.
		Most people just don't have that kind of money lying around.
		If you're a family living paycheck to paycheck, if you're a young couple saving up to buy a home, if you're a small business owner already cutting back on costs because everything is more expensive now, what are you supposed to do?
		This is not a crisis the Democrats have cooked.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		And that was Senator Brian Schatz on the House or the Senate floor today.
		Let's hear from Dina calling in from Corbyn, Kentucky on our Republican line.
		Please go ahead, Dina.
unidentified		Hi, and actually, Dinah.
		Okay.
		And regarding the shutdown, what I want to say is that, first of all, regarding the illegal immigrants that will be using emergency care, I understand that someone's going to have to pay for those bills,
		but I don't think we need to be supplying them with health care for everyday medical treatment and giving them insurance for that because then they're going to be going all the time.
		And that doesn't mean we need to be supplying them with the insurance, Eric, because then they can go every time instead of treating a common cold at home or allergies and other things.
		And that adds up to a lot more money than an emergency treatment.
		Regarding another thing that affects the shutdown, if we have a lot of extraneous positions that a receptionist and a secretary can handle the same jobs I did for years, then we need to cut some of those jobs permanently, not just furlough them now.
		And we need to stop Congress from giving themselves all these huge raises.
		And that will help with the budget.
		So, one, I think we need to cut this piggyback or whatever you want to call it, money for illegal immigrants.
		The only money that needs to be there is to send them back wherever they came from, unless they are going to be targeted for torture.
		Then we need to cut this random raise is given all the time.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		All right, Dinah, in Corbyn, Kentucky, we appreciate your calling in.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Katie Edmondson, was it politically savvy of both the Democrats and the Republicans to make health care the issue on this continuing resolution?
unidentified		Well, I think Democrats realize that health care is an issue that traditionally has been very helpful for them at the ballot box.
		In 2018, of course, Democrats won the House back, running pretty narrowly on the failed effort back in 2017 by the Republican Congress to repeal and replace Obamacare.
		That being said, I think you see Republicans actually trying to make not health care the issue, right, but the idea of illegal immigration and illegal immigrants receiving health care an issue because, again, they know that immigration has been traditionally the strong issue for them at the ballot box.
		I will just add also, because the caller mentioned it, members of Congress receiving pay raises.
		That is actually, Eric, you would know the last time they voted to give themselves a pay raise.
		It's many years ago.
		Yeah, maybe 2009.
		It's been a long time.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		And it's been pretty static except for cost of living, correct?
unidentified		Well, it's really just been static.
unidentified		It's been held even despite cost of living.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		It's politically impossible to give themselves a raise.
suhas subramanyam ▲ ● ▼		Right.
unidentified		So that's actually not correct what the caller was saying.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Joining us from Virginia is Representative Suhas Subramayam, a Democrat from Virginia.
		He represents a large swath of northern Virginia, right outside of Washington, D.C., with a lot of federal employees.
		Congressman, how has day one of this shutdown, has it impacted your district yet?
suhas subramanyam ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, absolutely.
		I mean, people are upset.
		They're scared.
		They're really concerned.
		I've heard from federal workers and don't forget contractors as well, people who really provide important services to our government and to the American people.
		And they will go completely without pay for as long as there's a shutdown.
		And federal workers will go furloughed.
		And so this is difficult.
		People have mortgages, and Virginia is already a high cost of living state.
		And so, you know, we're rolling out legislation to try to protect and help federal workers and contractors through this time, but it's very difficult.
		And I think people are frustrated and upset.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		So why not pass a clean seven-week CR and allow negotiations on further appropriations and potentially on the health care issues that the Democrats have raised continue?
suhas subramanyam ▲ ● ▼		Well, look, I would love to pass a totally clean CR, but that's not what this is.
		I mean, this is a continuation of the policies this administration has been putting forward.
		And what you're funding in here is not only cuts to health care and people's access to the care, but you're also continuing the firings of the federal workforce, the Trump administration's takeover of the federal government agencies that he would then weaponize against political opponents.
		And so there's a lot in the CR that isn't so clean.
		The only clean start CR we've had in recent years is the one back in December.
		That was one where Democrats and Republicans came together and agreed.
		Even President Trump agreed to that.
		But what we have now is a bill that's going to continue these firings of the federal workforce and these cuts to health care and other critical benefits that the American people rely on.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Congressman Subramayam Eric Wasson of Bloomberg is here with me.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		He has a question for you.
unidentified		Hi, Congressman.
		Thanks so much for talking with us.
		My question is: how do we get out of this shutdown?
		I mean, do you guys need your full counterproposal in order to agree to reopen the government?
		Or is there somewhere you see a deal sort of coming together?
		And what's the general sense of the atmosphere for a deal?
		Is there so much partisanship right now between your two parties that you can even come to a deal?
suhas subramanyam ▲ ● ▼		You know, there's a lot of partisanship, and this is the most polarized political environment we've had in a long time.
		And so that's something I've tried to address.
		And I've been someone who's worked across the aisle really effectively and tried to be bipartisan.
		The problem is, you know, I showed up the last couple of days.
		You know, I'm local, but I can be in D.C. anytime and will be in D.C. as much as I can because I'm ready to negotiate a deal.
		Even JD Vance said in a press conference today that he'll meet with any Democrat anytime.
		And so I just told him, I'm ready.
		I'm ready to meet with you.
		So we haven't really had a negotiation or a conversation.
		And Republicans have had many months to work with us.
		But even many Democrats like Chuck Schumer, who voted for the CR last time, have started to understand that Republicans are not to be trusted when it comes to saying, oh, yeah, we'll do this later on.
		So let's pass this now.
		We'll do this later on.
		We can't trust Republicans with that anymore.
		They've lost our trust.
		They've lost the trust of the American people.
		And so what we want is for them to come to the table and work with us on these life or death issues, like access to health care or these critical issues to people in my district, like the firings of the federal workforce.
		And to be clear, I mean, these are really popular things.
		I mean, the public really wants access to care.
		They don't want to double their premiums in January.
		They want to make sure in my region that they're not getting fired for no reason or being ripped or having their pay cut in any way.
		So I think these are popular issues.
		It's a very easy off-ramp.
		I almost feel like we're doing Republicans a favor by having them do this.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Katie Edmondson is with the New York Times.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		She's also here, Congressman.
unidentified		Hi, Congressman.
		Thanks for being here.
		My question for you is: we've heard from the White House and, in particular, from the budget director, Russ Vogt, that they want to, in fact, use this shutdown to accelerate some of the policies you just talked about objecting to, in particular, firing federal employees, accelerating that campaign.
		Given that, how do you make the case to your constituents, particularly those who are federal workers, that this shutdown fight that Democrats are engaged in is worth continuing for, particularly for an indeterminate amount of time?
suhas subramanyam ▲ ● ▼		Well, what Russ Vogt said is illegal.
		You can't be firing people during a shutdown.
		And look at the past nine months.
		They've been firing people anyway.
		They've been shutting down the government anyway.
		They're just shutting down all the places and agencies and offices that they don't like and putting in Trump loyalists to replace them and weaponizing agencies like the FBI and the DOJ.
		And I talked to the federal workers who are still there all the time.
		I mean, it's not a great place to work right now.
		Many of them left the private sector and took a lower-paying job in the government because they believed in their mission.
		And they have Doge staffers still walking up and down the hallways trying to find reasons to fire them, essentially.
		And so that's where we are right now.
		And I think many of them are really upset.
		And so, you know, some of them have told me, shut it down until they change the way they're doing things.
		I've heard that many times.
		But I don't want to shut down.
		I want to figure out a way where we can get the government back on track.
		And I'd like to pass budgets and stop this whole CR process.
		But what Russ Vote's saying is illegal.
		And frankly, they're doing it anyway.
		And so, you know, my response to that is you're going to keep firing people that are essential to the functioning of our government, to the American people.
		And a lot of times they've actually hired those people back because they're so essential.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Congressman Subramayam, you've asked the Republicans to compromise.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		What's your compromise?
suhas subramanyam ▲ ● ▼		I mean, I want to come to the table.
		I've said it very clearly.
		We have a healthcare crisis looming right now.
		It's already here in a lot of cases.
		We have rural health clinics that are closing down right now.
		And so let's make sure we shore up health care right now and stop this crisis that is about to hit so many American families.
		And let's stop these firings of federal workers and contractors.
		They do great work for the American people.
		And so let's actually figure out a way to move forward and protect them and give them some sort of predictability.
		And let's respect the power of the purse for the U.S. Congress.
		I mean, some of these actions are taking money that Congress appropriated and using it in a way that is unlawful, frankly.
		And so, yes, we have lawsuits and many of them have been successful, but we need assurances that when we're going to fund the government, the funds we're sending over there are used in the manner that we actually appropriate because that's our job.
		And that's the checks and balances that our founding fathers put in place.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Suhas Subramayam represents Loudoun, Fairfax County, and Northern Virginia.
		He's a Democrat.
		It's just outside of Washington, D.C.
		And, sir, we appreciate your time this evening.
suhas subramanyam ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Eric Wasson, did you hear anything new in what he had to say?
unidentified		Well, I see, I feel like Democrats are still being very coy about where the compromise could be.
		You know, they have a long list of things that they want to see, including the repeal of the Medicaid provisions in the Big Beautiful bill, the Obamacare subsidies extension, and this impoundment issue.
		I guess, you know, it makes sense.
		They don't want to negotiate in the media and really tell us where their real red lines are.
		But what I'm hearing from him, especially someone who represents a lot of federal workers and is worried about the actions of the White House budget office, is that he really will be one of those pushing to have this impoundment issue sort of restriction put in there.
		And that it could be something that sort of interferes with those in the more moderate members of the party.
		I started Jean Shaheen, who was on our network, Bloomberg Television earlier.
		And she was basically really focused on the Obamacare issue.
		And I think she's down playing the other issues there.
		Seems like this representative would have a harder line if he was in the talks.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Are you saying that Gene Shaheen could be one of the jailbreakers?
unidentified		Certainly.
		She and Hassan, who was the other New Hampshire, were among the 10 Democratic caucus members who voted for the March continuing resolution.
		They're people who have already shown that they're among the most reticent to shut down the government.
		And they're the people probably on the forefront of any deal here.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		So just to count numbers here, 53 Republicans, three jailbreaks already, Federman, Ocasio, or Cortez-Masto.
unidentified		Angus King.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		And Angus King.
unidentified		And then you have Rand Paul going against it.
		He's a hard no on the Republican over the spending levels.
		So they know he's.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		So you need five more Democrats to come over.
		That's right.
		And do you see a path to that?
		You've mentioned two.
		Are there others out there?
unidentified		You know, I was actually doing exactly this math earlier today, and I think that it's possible, but I think that it's harder than some may think.
		In part because some of the Democrats who were counted in that initial clutch of 10 voted for the CR, not really because they believed in the cause so much, but they were close to leader Schumer.
		This is people like Senator Dick Durbin from Illinois, people like Brian Schatz of Hawaii.
		And we just heard from Senator Schatz, obviously.
		You played his remarks from the Senate floor.
		He is someone who sounds pretty dug in right now.
		And I think just in general, the Senate is lacking, particularly in the Democratic caucus, certainly in the Republican conference as well right now.
		There are not as many of those moderate members from states like for Democrats, Montana, West Virginia, Indiana anymore who really want to get to yes, who really want to compromise.
		So I think you can eventually get to eight, but I think the path might be a little more difficult today than it would have been, say, even five or six years ago.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Friday is the next set of votes, correct?
unidentified		That's right.
		Well, after 1.30, we're looking at that.
		But I would add, you know, to bolster the 10 people who voted for the 10 senators, I should say, the march.
		You know, you have the Virginia and Maryland delegations who are disproportionately impacted by federal firings.
		You know, you have someone like Ruben Gallego, who is vulnerable in Arizona.
		I saw him on the Senate floor, was among this gang of people talking about a potential deal.
		You even saw Lujan in New Mexico.
		Pretty safe to see, ultimately, but someone who's looking to do sort of a bipartisan deal.
		I think you could get those numbers.
		But, you know, you would have to get Chuck Schumer on board.
		I don't think they would, unless the shutdown is dragging for a very long period of time and the firings are really up.
		The idea that he would not in some way bless them going over and voting for it is a little hard to believe right now, but maybe we get to that point.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Well, Catherine Cortez-Masto, senator from Nevada, her colleague, Jackie Rosen, had a very close Senate election last year.
		I think she's up next year.
		Here is what Manu Raju is quoting her as saying from CNN.
		I don't see actually engaging in a shutdown that's going to harm people to help people.
		Our goal should be to help everyone, is what she is saying.
		So she is one of those vulnerable ones, as you mentioned.
		Let's hear from Arthur in Sulphur, Louisiana.
		Democrats lying.
		Hi, Arthur.
unidentified		Hello.
		I'm turning TV down.
		I had a whole bunch of different points, reminding myself to keep it to the shutdown.
		So basically, as far as dealing with the shutdown in public, it fits what they've always done, which is deny and project psychology 101.
		Say, I'm not doing it.
		They're doing it.
		And the second thing is I'm 73.
		My dad was a union man with railroad.
		I worked 35 years for big oil company.
		Union became United Steelworkers.
		And ever since Reagan busted Pat Coe in 84, then Gingrich, with his trouble being a hypocrite in around the mid-90s, it's all of a sudden reading that Hitler went after his political opponents first.
		It's like the big business march against labor has dovetailed with Trump through Putin's coaching.
		I know this is shut down, but and so we've arrived at a place where now What's happening?
		Back up and look at the events.
		I mean, if Putin was the president, it wouldn't be any worse.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		All right, Arthur, we're going to leave it there.
		Eric Wasson, you said you've been on the Hill since 2007.
		Has it gotten worse or is it more of the same, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera?
		We hear from people who say, oh, this is the worst it's ever been, and some of us can go back and relive the 90s and the 2000s.
unidentified		Certainly when we see, you know, I continue to be surprised when we see this, the president sending out on Twitter this picture of Hakeem Jeffries with a sombrero and then Democrats like Gavin Newson responding by putting JD Vance looking like a minion.
		I mean, this is a level of stupidity we've never really seen before.
		It's childish.
		I think, you know, there are certainly people in both parties, very intelligent, who would think this is sort of embarrassing.
		So I think we're getting to a level of discourse that's unfortunate.
		One thing I would note, though, I think President Trump is perhaps the most powerful president as far as Congress I've ever seen, both the willingness to do, you know, stretch the bounds of legality in the budget office, but also the ability to command votes.
		You know, the Freedom Caucus was something Katie and I wrote about for years and their ability to upend things at the last minute.
		They've been tamed and they've been tamed because of Trump.
		You know, this is something that someone like Biden or Obama could probably only dream of.
		So I think that's part of the story here is just Trump's real talents as a politician and leader of his party, but also just the way it's added to the divisiveness and the sort of vitriol that we see in the Hill.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Now, Katie Edmondson, you're probably a social media and a digital native, unlike Eric and myself, especially me.
		Are you active on social media as a New York Times reporter?
		And are you extra careful about what you put on social media and do you get responses from people?
unidentified		Oh, I try to post on social media as little as I possibly can get away with, but I certainly am on it to see what lawmakers are posting.
		And I think that is a big change.
		Even in the last seven years that I have covered Congress when I got to the Hill, I think social media obviously was an incredibly important way for lawmakers to get out how they were thinking about things, how they might vote on a piece of legislation.
		But there was sort of hybrid in that they also would do sort of the traditional routes of interviews with mainstream media, press conferences.
		And I think now you see some lawmakers decide, you know, perhaps they would not like to do an interview with a wire service.
		They'd rather go on to prime time on a cable news network that has a host with a political leaning that favors or is in line with theirs.
		And I do think, you know, Eric was talking about sort of the polarization that we're seeing, but also just sort of the poor level of discourse that we're seeing.
		And obviously, I think that is largely being driven by social media as well and the incentives that it introduced for lawmakers.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Do you see relationships up there, though, on the Hill that perhaps you don't see on social media, that a Democrat and Republican can be friendly or work together on certain issues?
unidentified		I think that's true.
		We see that even sometimes on social media, frankly, the immediate example that came to mind was Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who of course is sort of an icon of the liberal left, is good friends with Congressman Tim Burchett of Tennessee, who is a member of the Freedom Caucus.
		I think in general though, even putting aside relationships like that, just the sort of tone that lawmakers bring, even to one-on-one interviews on the Hill with us reporters, is much more toned down, much more civil, right, than you see on social media.
		Yeah, I would agree with that.
		And one of the great privileges of our job is we get to talk to Republicans, Democrats, and see them in person, in person.
		They're almost unfailingly nice.
		I say 99% of the members are actually nice people.
		There's a few people who are.
		I won't mention who they are.
		But, you know, at the end of the day, social media and the persona theater in a way, but the theater is starting to erode the actual personal relationships and starting to interfere with that.
		And we see the acrimony building and we may see it in the shutdown sort of reaching a new crescendo.
		We'll have to see how it plays out.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Well, we've discussed this issue, but there's kind of a unique angle to this shutdown and how long it may last.
		And this is the rift, the reduction in force angle.
		Here is President Trump and White House Press Secretary Carolyn Levitt from the last two days talking about this issue.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		We don't want it to shut down because we have the greatest period of time ever.
		I told you, we have $17 trillion being invested.
		So the last person that wants to shut down is us now.
		With that being said, we can do things during the shutdown that are irreversible, that are bad for them and irreversible by them, like cutting vast numbers of people out, cutting things that they like, cutting programs that they like.
		And you know, you all know Russell Vogt.
		He's become very popular recently because he can trim the budget to a level that you couldn't do any other way.
		So they're taking a risk by having a shutdown because because of the shutdown, we can do things medically and other ways, including benefits.
		We can cut large numbers of people out.
		We don't want to do that, but we don't want fraud, waste, and abuse.
		And, you know, we're cutting that.
		But they want to have illegal aliens come into our country and get massive health care at the cost to everybody else.
		And we don't have it.
		And that's, I would say, the number one reason that they want to strike is to get illegal immigrants' health care.
		And, you know, Gavin Newsom wants that too in California, and it's destroying California.
		We can't have that.
		We're not going to let it happen.
unidentified		I have two questions.
		One, we're talking a lot about these layoffs and hypotheticals, but Speaker Johnson earlier today said that there is a proposal from the White House that House Republicans are expected to hear this afternoon about these mass layoffs.
		Can you tell us what is in that proposal, what agencies, what programs, what jobs?
karoline leavitt ▲ ● ▼		What he's referring to is a proposal that our Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vogt is going to be proposing to the House Republican Conference.
		He's going to kind of walk them through what this, unfortunately, is going to look like so they can discuss it with their constituents back home in their respective districts.
		So I don't want to get ahead of the Office of Management and Budget, but I'm sure you'll be hearing more about that very soon.
		We have to put a plan in place.
		It would be irresponsible of us not to take a look at each and every agency and get an understanding of what we're going to have to do moving forward to do the best we can in the midst of this government shutdown.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Eric Wasson Bloomberg, what did you hear there?
unidentified		You know, I thought it was very interesting.
		You know, this is in some ways a nightmare for Republican strategists because the thing with the shutdown, you don't want to get the blame.
		And when the president goes out there and says, we're going to do mass firings or make it painful, take away people's benefits, that tends to sort of get the blame more towards the president.
		You know, I was talking to Kevin Kramer, the North Dakota Republican senator, and he was questioning the political wisdom of Russ Vogt doing mass firing, saying, look, this is about Democrats causing pain and disruption from a shutdown.
		That's how we win this fight.
		We go out there and we make that message.
		And in the past, that tends to work.
		But if you're out there taking advantage, quote unquote, to do your own mass fires, do your own agenda.
		Russ Vote canceled in 18 or put under serious review at $18 billion infrastructure programs in New York, the 2nd Avenue subway and the Hudson Rail tunnels.
		He's also talked about $8 billion in green energy or energy funding that will probably raise people's electric bills in certain parts of the country.
		Once you're taking those actions, then the blame game becomes more muddied.
		And I heard frustration from Kevin Kramer and from others on the Hill that the president is not really on message there.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Katie Edmondson.
unidentified		Well, I also think, and we've talked about the extent to which Democrats may feel that they need to move to reopen government more quickly as a result of some of these mass layoffs, the idea that they want to staunch the bleeding, they want to end the suffering.
		But I think there's another side to the coin of that, which is Democrats have been so infuriated by what they see as the heavy-handedness, the overreach of the executive branch when it comes to impoundment, canceling the spending that Democrats like, leaving the spending that Republicans like in place.
		And I think a lot of them see this the same way, right?
		Why should we lend our votes to a government that you are going to weaponize against us as Democrats that you are going to use to lay off employees at agencies you don't like, but allow the federal employees to continue work at agencies you do.
		And so I think there are actually political risks for Republicans, as Eric said, on both sides of the coin here when it comes to weaponizing those mass layoffs.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Tomorrow is Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, so the Congress will not be in session.
		Next sessions are scheduled for this Friday.
		Will there be anything that we should watch for tomorrow and then, of course, on Friday?
unidentified		Well, I think the first thing to watch for is whether Leader Thune and Leader Schumer, the two Senate leaders, actually meet for negotiations.
		I think that we also will be able to get a sense of whether a sort of bipartisan gang, a bipartisan group of senators, whether they really are able to pick up any momentum in some of these private talks they've been having.
		I personally will be wanting to check in with the Democratic senators to hear what they're hearing from their constituents, whether they are feeling that they want to wrap up this shutdown.
		But I kind of expect them to hear more of the same of what we just heard from the Democratic congressman from Virginia, which is that the message from their base will largely be keep up the fight.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Now, Katie Edmondson, before we let you go, this tracker that you have that we read from where 80% of the employees of EPA and Education Commerce are being furloughed, et cetera, et cetera, really valuable information if we could put it up one more time for our viewers.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		How hard is that to get to?
unidentified		You know, I have to give all of the credit to our graphics team at the New York Times who have been sort of relentlessly scrubbing federal data to be able to bring that tracker to life on our website.
unidentified		But I expect, as Eric was saying, that it will sort of move around in the coming days because, again, we have yet to see exactly how the White House has decided they want to play this one.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Eric Wasson, Bloomberg, what's the prognosis for this?
unidentified		You know, I thought that the shutdown would last until mid-October.
		That's when we see military paychecks coming out.
		And that tends to create a lot of pressure on lawmakers.
		I'm sort of more leaning to maybe it's over by Monday if this gang talks really heat up.
		We'll have a sense of it on Friday.
		But just seeing the start of what we call a jail break on the Democratic side, the start of this potential moderates talks, the hinting that being allowed to have, you know, being promised a guaranteed vote might allow them to vote for even a short-term, perhaps four-week stopgap.
		You know, there's signs that this thing could be over sooner than I had thought, but I do think mid-October would probably be the length.
		You know, that's when you really start to see the troops not being paid.
		People, you know, people don't always remember, but the Trump shutdown really ended when air traffic controllers threatened to just walk out and shut down the skies because they're tired of working for without a paycheck.
		So that's when things really start to come to a head.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		But you also see a window to it ending potentially between Friday and Monday of this week.
unidentified		I think so.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Do you see that same window?
unidentified		You know, I'm an eternal pessimist, so I think they may need a little bit more time to get a breakthrough, but we'll see.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Katie Edmondson, New York Times, Eric Wasson, Bloomberg, please come back.
		Thank you for setting the stage for us and helping us to understand what is going on.
		We're going to continue to take your calls for the next half hour.
		We want to hear your reaction to day one of this government shutdown, the discussion that we had here.
		So we've got a half hour of calls coming up.
		First, we were out in Washington, D.C., talking to people about the government shutdown and its impact.
		Mike Flood, R. Nebraska.
		This is Peter Slent at C-SPAN.
		How are you, sir?
unidentified		Good.
		How are you doing?
		Good.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Are you in Omaha or Lincoln?
unidentified		I'm in Norfolk, Nebraska.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Norfolk.
unidentified		That is Johnny Carson's proud hometown.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Is it really?
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		How far out of the eastern metro area are you?
unidentified		About two hours north and west of Omaha.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Okay, cool.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		You're up by South Dakota, Montana, then.
unidentified		I like to think they're by us.
unidentified		Yeah, South Dakota is 60 miles north of me.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Okay, all right.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		So you're quite close to Mount Rushmore out there.
unidentified		No, no, no, no.
		I'm probably seven hours away.
		That's on the western side of South Dakota.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Okay, so I keep thinking South Dakota extends, and I'm making motions here with my hand.
		You can't see me.
		But I keep thinking that where you are is further.
		But yeah, I gotcha.
		I gotcha.
unidentified		When you're driving around the East Coast, if you drive seven hours, you go through five states.
unidentified		You can drive seven hours and still be in Nebraska.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Hey, I've done it.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		I'm from Indiana.
unidentified		Oh, good.
unidentified		Well, I'm in school at Notre Dame, so I know that.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		You did.
		I went to school up in Minnesota.
		Where at?
		St. Olaf College.
unidentified		Oh, yeah.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Yep.
		Now you betcha.
		As we say in Minnesota.
		You betcha.
unidentified		Is that in Fred Finstead's district?
unidentified		Do you know it's Rice County?
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		No, it's not Rice.
		I think it's Rice County.
		And I've looked at it.
		I think it's Angie.
unidentified		Oh, okay.
unidentified		Yeah, 30 seconds.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		I'm blanking.
		I only got 30 seconds.
		I'll be with you in just a second, Congressman.
		Thanks for being with us.
unidentified		You bet.
unidentified		Thanks for having me.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		And those videos that you saw were just taken today here in Washington, D.C. on day one of the federal government shutdown.
		The Capitol gets about 7,000 visitors a day, as does the Washington Monument, and they are both closed to visitors.
		They were open to lawmakers today, and many, many press conferences were being held.
		But we want to get your reaction to the conversation that we've been having for the last hour with the two reporters.
		They are now gone.
		We want to hear from you.
		202 is the area code, 748-8001, if you're Republican.
		748-8000 for Democrats.
		And Independents, 202-748-8002.
		You can see our social media addresses at the bottom.
		Just remember, at C-SPAN if you're on X or on Facebook.
		Well, joining us from Norfolk, Nebraska is Congressman Mike Flood, a Republican from that state.
		Congressman, what would be the issue with continuing the subsidies that the Democrats are calling for for the ACA health benefits?
unidentified		Well, you know, before we even get to that, let's look at what we're actually asking them to do.
		And I'm a Republican that has always voted to fund the government.
		Even when members of my own party weren't wanting to fund the government in the last Congress, I always voted to do it, and I joined Democrats to do it.
		We're asking them to extend once again, which they've already done it once, the Biden-Schumer budget that we all agreed on in the last Congress, which doesn't seem like too much of a stretch.
		Now, these ACA credits, I get it.
		They want to talk about that.
		They're not set to expire until December 31st.
		They're fraught with fraud in a lot of ways.
		There are a lot of people that are using these credits as well, and it's complicated.
		You know, I'm the chair of the Main Street Caucus, and I'll be honest, we have members that want to see these expire.
		We have members that want to see them extended.
		We have members that want to see that modified and extended.
		This is not something we should be doing with this kind of situation where the government's not funded.
		I get that the Democrats want some kind of a bargaining chip, but they've already done this once.
		They've already extended this funding once in March.
		Schumer did it.
		The only reason we find ourselves in this situation now is he paid a very high price from the far left when he did it back in March.
		And to cover his own backside, here we are putting federal employees kind of a hostage situation while we sort this out.
		And I'm not somebody that's hyper-partisan.
		I call balls and strikes, and I see this one as a very simple question.
		All we're doing is extending this until November 21st so that we can get our bipartisan budget that will require 60 votes on or before that day.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Is there a path forward if the Republican leadership says, okay, let's reopen the government, vote for this clean bill, and we will have a vote on extending the ACA subsidies?
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Is that politically viable?
unidentified		Well, I think your question begs, you know, the bigger question, which is, okay, Republicans, how are we going to get to 60 votes in November?
		Like, this exercise doesn't get easier.
		Everything's going to require some compromise.
		And we know that.
		Like, I know that.
		Our conference knows that.
		We know that our budget has to be bipartisan.
		It has to get 60 votes.
mike flood ▲ ● ▼		Or we're on this terrible groundhog day movie where the same thing like we're seeing now happens seven weeks from now.
unidentified		So here's what I'd say: everything has to be on the table as we go into November 21st.
		I know that's important to the Democrats.
		And to be quite honest, it's important to some of the Republicans as well.
		But that's not the issue today.
		The issue today is funding the government so that our troops get paid, so that we have WIC benefits, women-infinited children benefits, so that you can transfer real estate.
		Right now, without the federal flood insurance policy available to homeowners and those wanting those policies, you can't even sell your house if you're in a floodplain during this shutdown.
		So there's so many bad things that are happening here.
mike flood ▲ ● ▼		I just don't understand why we don't do the right thing, kick this to November 21st, and then come up with a deal that may or may not include some of those tax credits.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Congressman Flood, your district goes from outside Omaha through half of the state or so.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Is that a fairly important thing?
mike flood ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I have all of the city of Lincoln, which is the largest city in my district.
unidentified		It's also our capital city, home to the University of Nebraska.
		It inches up towards Norfolk through Columbus and Fremont.
		And then in Sarpi County, just south of Omaha, I have the wonderful cities of Bellevue, home to Offutt Air Force Base, Papillion, and La Vista.
		And then it winds around and kind of does a you all the way back up to the community I live in, which is Norfolk.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		And what's the estimate of how many federal employees live in your district?
unidentified		Well, I know I have at least 10,000 that are at Offutt Air Force Base, which also serves as the home to Stratcom Combatant Command, where we are in charge of the nuclear triad.
		So we have a very important mission in Bellevue at Offutt.
		There's at least 10,000 people there.
		As far as a total district-wide, I'd have to think that we're anywhere from 15 to 17,000, given the fact that we have the state capital also in my district.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Has there been an impact as of yet, 21 hours in?
unidentified		Well, most of the people are with the Department of Defense, so they would be exempt.
		They will be working without pay, though.
		I also know that the food processing and the food safety inspectors remain on the job.
		That's very important because we're the number one beef state in the nation.
		We have poultry, we have pork.
		All of those kill facilities will have their food inspectors that will remain on the job subject to not getting a paycheck.
		But I think it will have an effect with USDA service offices, some of the administration around not only USDA, but the EPA and some of the other state agencies/slash/federal departments that commingle together in Lincoln.
		But in the big picture, for the majority of the folks that I represent, they're going to remain on the job without pay.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		So, Friday, you will be back in town, or the House will be back in session.
		This is really a Senate story.
		Again, the House on September 19th passed a seven-week so-called clean continuing resolution.
		And it's now up to the Senate to pass something or other.
		And if they pass the same bill, it'll then go to President Trump.
		But if they adjusted it all, it could come back to the House, correct?
unidentified		You're right.
		And you were right also earlier in your program to identify the fact that we've got this Yom Kippur holiday, which we're now beginning at sunset tonight across the United States until tomorrow.
		And so for those that observe, we are obviously not going to be having any House meetings or calls.
		I'm the chair of the Main Street caucus, and we've decided out of respect for our members that are observing, we are not going to be working during that period.
		But on Friday, we could be called back in.
		Most likely, I'm guessing for the House, it could be Monday before we're back.
		You're right, though.
		This is in the Senate's lap.
		You know, some people say, well, why don't you go back to Washington?
		I say, we can't.
		We'll go back to Washington.
		We'll pass the same bill.
		This is the first time in modern history that Republicans are unified on a shutdown.
		This is no small feat.
		I mean, Republicans are by nature very independent people.
		We feel that we have put something forward that does not have a poison pill in it.
		We're not asking the Democrats to do anything they haven't done before.
		They voted for this budget once in the 118th Congress, and they voted for it again in the Senate this year in March.
		Why can't we do it one more time knowing that we have to go forward and get a bipartisan budget, a mainline budget done that has our fingerprints on it as the 119th Congress signed by President Trump?
		I'm confident we can do it.
		This only hurts that process by delaying it even further.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Congressman Flood, I don't think you've been there this long, but I remember the days when the Appropriations Committee subcommittee chairs were cardinals and they were gods and goddesses up on Capitol Hill.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Is the budget process altered or broken?
unidentified		Well, I'll tell you what, there are Republicans, there are Democrats, and then there are appropriators.
		And these folks work to their credit in a bipartisan way.
		I have the most respect for Tom Cole, who is the chairman of the House Republican Appropriations Committee for the entire Appropriations Committee.
		He embodies public service.
		The state of Oklahoma is awfully lucky to have him.
		And I watch him work with the ranking member, and they have a relationship.
		If the world were left to people in appropriations, everything would work magically.
		I do worry about the appropriations process.
		I look at all the work that people do on both sides of the aisle.
		And then we come to a continuing resolution.
		It feels like we're crumpling up their work and putting it in the trash can for seven weeks.
		But here's the deal.
mike flood ▲ ● ▼		I'm confident that the leaders on both sides of the aisle of the Appropriations Committee in the House and the Senate, who are, by large, very exceptionally talented legislators.
unidentified		And I'm not just saying the Republicans, I'm saying the Democrats too.
		I would rather give them seven weeks to come up with a deal because of everybody in that Capitol complex, they know how to put a deal together.
		And if Tom Cole says it has his seal of approval, I can tell you in the Republican conference, there's probably 170 votes that minute that he says it.
		Got another 50 to go, but that's no different than any other bill on Capitol Hill.
		I would be thrilled to find ourselves in a spot before November 21st where Chairman Cole could announce kind of a plan forward on our federal budget.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Well, not to continue down this line too far, but this Congress convened on January 21st of this year, and only five or eight of the appropriations bills have passed.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Is there passed the House, let alone the Senate, let alone been signed by the President?
unidentified		Well, let's be honest.
		Like, I haven't been here very long.
		I've been here three years.
		This is more regular order than we ever saw under Speaker Emerita Pelosi, where it was kind of just hatched out of the four corners and lassoed and dropped on the middle of the Congress.
		We have been engaged in regular order.
		Our cardinals have been pushing bills to the floor.
		We have been passing bills in the House.
		John Thune has said that regular order is important to him.
		The Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, has talked about getting a conference committee together.
		Listen, this is the way Washington is supposed to work.
mike flood ▲ ● ▼		I come from a state where I was the Speaker of the nation's only unicameral, and everything was done regular order.
unidentified		It was always balanced.
		It was always on time, and it was always bipartisan.
		So that's what I expect.
		That's what I want.
		I'm hopeful that we can get there.
		And from what I hear from a lot of the cardinals that are on appropriations, they like the fact that we're pushing these individual bills to the floor.
		allows them to put their fingerprints on that.
		When Ken Calvert is working with his ranking member on the subcommittee on defense and they can put together and fashion a bill that deals with defense spending, that's good for the nation.
		That's good for Republicans and that's good for Democrats.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Final question, Congressman.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Have you heard any news from your senators, Ricketts and Fisher, regarding potential compromise in the Senate and how long this may last?
unidentified		I have been in touch with Senator Fisher.
		I know she is working very hard.
		I got a text from Senator Ricketts earlier today.
		Listen, we're from the middle of the country.
		We want Washington to work.
		We want there to be agreement.
		We also want to get this funding back on track so that we can pass a bipartisan budget.
		And we know it has to be bipartisan.
		We understand that.
		It will take 60 votes.
		But this is not the way to do it.
		I think Democrats are making a strategic mistake by letting this happen.
		Put your focus on the big show, which is the mainline budget, the one that really matters.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Mike Flood, Republican from Nebraska.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Thank you for your time, sir.
unidentified		You bet.
unidentified		Have a good night.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		We've got about 10, 15 minutes of calls, and we want to hear your voices now.
		And we're going to begin with Leon and Anchorage, Alaska, Democrats line.
		Leon, what do you think about this conversation we're having tonight?
		And what do you think about day one of this shutdown?
unidentified		Good evening.
		You know, I think the Republicans have a majority in the House and the Senate, and they also have the White House.
		And I don't want anybody to make the mistake of thinking that this is not a Republican-led government.
		And I'm proud of the Democratic leadership for standing up and fighting for health care for all Americans, especially those in rural areas and those with the least means.
		My state, Alaska, has almost 30,000 people using the Affordable Care Act, and Medicaid is vital to our state.
		And the Republicans want to cut that off.
		And all three of our Republican delegations, Senator Murkowski and Sullivan, and Representative Nick Begich, they all failed to work with the Democrats to preserve the health care funding for Alaskans.
		And I just heard Congressman Flood say that the Affordable Care Act credits are fraught with fraud.
		And that's a myth.
		It was debunked by the American Hospital Association on August 28th.
		And that was a studies were put out by Republicans to support their ending the ACA credits.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		So Leon, all that said, all that said, why not vote for a so-called clean seven-week extension that's passed the House and talk about this issue for the next seven weeks and see how that goes?
unidentified		Well, as was discussed earlier, the Republicans are not taking this seriously.
		And, you know, there's no reason to trust them to play fairly, and they're not coming to the table with anything concrete.
		They're putting out silly memes on, you know, and acting unprofessionally.
		They're saying that the pain will be felt if these health care funding needs are preserved and the shutdown continues.
		But the pain if those health care funding needs are not met will be far greater.
		And, you know, the conduct that they've exhibited in this administration, they've left Democrats with very little tools to negotiate with.
		And so I think that Democrats are using what they've been handed, and that's a good thing.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Leon and Anchorage, we really appreciate your time this evening.
		Next up, Phil, Long Island, Independent.
		Hi, Phil.
unidentified		Hey, how are you doing?
		I've been following this thing for the last three days in your channel with the coverage and everything.
		And, you know, there's some myths on both sides.
		You know, there's a lot of loopholes in the ACA subsidies.
		You know, so I totally disagree with your last caller.
		Of course, if you're self-employed or you're a tip worker and you're making tips in cash and that's undeclared, all right, so your basic salary is showing less, which would offer you the opportunity for the subsidies for the ACA.
		On top of that, when they say there are no illegal immigrants getting subsidies or Medicaid, that's a little bit of a half of truth on both sides.
		So if you come here under legal status, you're entitled to medical benefits, Medicaid, and the subsidies.
		But once your visa expires and nobody's cleaning up those roles, right?
		As we've seen with the superintendent in Des Moines, Iowa, right?
		His visa expired 20-something years ago, and he's been here and he had a self-deport order and he didn't do it a few years back.
		But the point is, nobody's cleaning up the roles when the visas expires in certain states.
		So those people stay on, and nobody's cross-referencing them with the IRS.
		And on top of it, the Wall Street Journal has been reporting for months that premiums were going up.
		All right.
		It was just the nature of the beast.
		And when you have states like New York and other big states that force insurance companies to cover things like in vitro fertilization, which I'm not against, I feel for those people.
		But when you keep making insurance companies cover more things, of course, their bottom line is going to go down so they're going to look to find ways to make more money.
		And on top of that.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Hey, Phil, has this been a topic of conversation among your coworkers, your neighbors, your friends at all?
unidentified		Excuse me, sir?
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Has this been a topic of conversation among your coworkers, your friends, your neighbors, the shutdown and whether or not who's responsible, et cetera?
unidentified		Yes, we've had these conversations.
		And what it comes down to, like I said, I'm an independent, right?
		They could have negotiated this.
		They didn't have to take off from July to September.
		They knew this was coming.
		So they're all full of it, right?
		And on top of it, if a clean CR would have been enough to get us through, all right?
		And now you hear Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffery saying, and the Senate is saying, aren't what you've been covering great, is, well, the exchanges start next month.
		If they knew they started next month, we all knew they started next month.
		Why didn't they start this campaign to get this fixed a few months ago instead of using it as an extortion tactic right now?
		So their best bet right now is to go for the clean CR, all right, and work to get this other stuff done by January or extend them again for a short period of time until they can find a solution.
		I don't want to see people without medical coverage.
		I can't afford it.
		But I'll close on this.
		You know, France has got financial difficulties.
		England has financial difficulties.
		Okay.
		South Africa, right, right now was reported on Bloomberg last week that they're looking at giving medical benefits for immigrants that come there because it's costing them too much.
		And that was reported on Bloomberg Middle Eastern Horizons a few days ago.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		All right, Phil, we're going to have to leave it there.
		We've got a lot of calls.
		Throughout the evening, we've been showing you live shots from the Statue of Liberty, the Washington Monument, the U.S. Capitol.
		These are all iconic American monuments, and that all were closed today to visitors because of day one of the government shutdown, which began at midnight, September 30th, last night.
		It began at midnight.
		We're running a clock on C-SPAN telling you how long it's lasted.
		This is the 21st lapse of funding or a government shutdown since 1980.
		It's the fourth during a Trump administration.
		His first administration, this is the first one of the second Trump administration.
		That's the most of any president.
		The longest shutdown ever, 35 days in 2018 and 2019.
		It was during the Trump administration.
		It lasted for 35 days.
		Presidents Obama and Biden each had one shutdown themselves.
		Just to give you a sense of what the federal government's spending issue is and how much is being spent, how much is being mandatory, how much is discretionary.
		The federal budget currently, and the one we're operating under, is $6.95 trillion.
		Of that, $3 trillion, 45%, is Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, all mandatory spending.
		Total mandatory spending, about $4 trillion.
		Discretionary spending, about $2 billion.
		Defense spending, $884 billion.
		Non-defense spending, $995 billion.
		There's nearly 3 million federal employees as of August 2025.
		Those are just some facts to keep in your circulation as you look at these issues.
		Darrell in Kentucky, Republican.
unidentified		Yes, I've been hearing your guests on there between the Capitol Hill and the lady from New York Times and the gentleman from Virginia, 10th District.
unidentified		I think they're all a bunch of fake news.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Why?
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Why?
unidentified		Because they don't report what goes on in the Capitol.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Now, was there fake news delivered tonight, do you think?
unidentified		Yes.
		Because Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House, they had 24 pages, and the Democrats don't want to look at it.
		Chuck Schumber and Aheem Jeffries, they want to spend $1.5 trillion, $1.5 trillion to help the immigrants out for their Medicare.
		They want to spend about $500 million on them, and they don't care about the American people.
		People, Republicans didn't shut it down.
		The Democrat shut it down.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Darrell in Kentucky, Republican line.
		Darryl, thank you for your perspective.
		Rachel's in Arizona, Democrats line.
		Rachel, you're on C-SPAN.
unidentified		Yes.
		Hello.
		Can you hear me?
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		We're listening.
unidentified		Yes.
		I am from Tucson, Arizona.
		And my concern has been, first of all, we have Adelita Grijalva, who just won an election, and she has not been sworn in by Mike Johnson, which is a travesty.
		This area is not being represented because he will not swear her in.
		That's the first thing.
		On the issue of the shutdown, if someone could explain to me, as under the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, undocumented immigrants are barred from enrolling in federal health coverage programs, including Medicaid, Medicare, and the CHIP program, Children's Health Insurance.
		And I keep hearing that there's all this horrible issue with fraud.
		And 68% of people on Medicaid are working full-time.
		24% are working part-time.
		So I think a lot of the issues, the facts are not getting out.
		Illegal immigrants are not getting taxpayer money.
		They are not.
		They can't.
		So I don't know when I hear that, it makes my blood boil.
		I've worked with immigrants.
		I've worked with asylum seekers.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Rachel, what kind of work do you do in Tucson?
unidentified		Well, I'm a retired educator, 74 years old, and I've been in the education system for most 35 years.
		But as far as what I'm doing now, I'm doing volunteer work through church and through separate organizations that help people who are disadvantaged and need help.
		And when we had the asylum seekers, we helped make lunches for them, get them ready so that they could travel to wherever the work was that they were needed.
		As far as refugees, these are legal refugees that came, have come through the UN and through Lutheran Social Services.
		And they are getting some benefit at the very beginning.
		They only have a couple months, and then they're on their own.
		They have to get their job.
		They contribute to our country.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Rachel in Tucson.
		We appreciate your perspective as well.
		Very quickly, Jack in California, we got about 30 seconds.
unidentified		Yeah, hi.
		What would be helpful is if someone could explain the origin of the premium tax credits goes back to COVID-19.
		They're supposed to be temporary.
		How did they get extended in 2021 through 2025?
		And then lastly, instead of using percentage increases, what would be the actual dollar increase for the estimated 20 million people that are eligible for the PTCs?
		There might be a high percentage increase, but my back of the napkin calculations is our dollar amounts relatively small.
		So it'd be helpful if you could explain with some actual numbers.
peter slen ▲ ● ▼		Jack, thanks for the idea.
		Good idea.
		Thank you.
		Well, this conversation will continue tomorrow morning on the Washington Journal beginning at 7 a.m. Eastern Time.
		We will continue the conversation around the government shutdown.
		And in fact, the appropriations chairman himself, Congressman Tom Cole, will be here, as will Oregon Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Dexter.
		She'll talk about the National Guard troops to her home state and home city of Portland.
		And finally, we will look at President Trump and Secretary Hegseth's speech to military leadership.
		That's all coming up tomorrow morning on the Washington Journal.
unidentified		On the first day of the government shutdown, the Senate again failed to advance funding proposals from both the Democrats and the Republicans.
		The GOP measure without health care subsidies failed, but did have some Democratic support.
		The Senate will be in session on Thursday, but no votes are scheduled until Friday.
		The House is not expected to work on funding legislation this week.
		Meanwhile, the White House has threatened a mass layoff of federal workers if the shutdown continues instead of short-term furloughs.
		You can continue following coverage of the shutdown across the C-SPAN networks on the C-SPAN Now app or online at c-span.org.
dasha burns ▲ ● ▼		I'm Dasha Burns, host of Ceasefire, bridging the divide in American politics.
unidentified		C-SPIRE premieres October 10th.
		Middle and high school students join C-SPAN as we celebrate America's 250th anniversary during our 2026 C-SPAN Student Cam Video Documentary Competition.
		This year's theme is Exploring the American Story through the Declaration of Independence.
		We're asking students to create a five to six minute documentary that answers one of two questions.
		What's the Declaration's influence on a key moment from America's 250-year history?
		Or how have its values touched on a contemporary issue that's impacting you or your community?
		We encourage all students to participate, regardless of prior filmmaking experience.
		Consider interviewing topical experts and explore a variety of viewpoints around your chosen issue.
		Students should also include clips of related C-SPAN footage, which are easy to download on our website, studentcam.org.
		C-SPAN's Student Cam competition awards $100,000 in total cash prizes to students and teachers, and $5,000 for the grand prize winner.

▲