The Washington Post editorial board is now calling for an end to the government shutdown, arguing that most Americans have been indifferent because the shutdown hasn't been directly affecting them. However, with funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) set to run out by November 1st, the "leverage" Democrats have lauded is now threatening to hurt nearly 42 million Americans directly. Even the Washington Post can see that the "leverage" is not worth the potential harm.
"The right answer is to reopen the government with a clean funding bill, ideally for a full year, to get food stamps flowing and federal workers back in the office, and then have a debate about ACA subsidies," the Post editorial read. "Democrats openly acknowledge that they refuse to do this because it would mean giving up their leverage. If they persist, it could mean families start to go hungry."
While technically the U.S. Department of Agriculture has emergency funds for situations like this, they said the funds are not "legally available," prompting more than two dozen states to sue.
Referring to the drying up of SNAP funding, the editorial board wrote, "This pain point, combined with three other dynamics, should help hasten an end to the shutdown as early as next week by making Democrats blink."
One of the other factors identified by the Washington Post is the start of the open enrollment period for purchasing healthcare, which begins on Saturday. While Democrats will likely claim that rising premium costs are the result of needing additional subsidies, the near-nonexistent likelihood of securing those subsidies, combined with the public’s recognition that responsibility for the shutdown lies with the Democrats, will only increase the pressure on them.
Recommended
"Many people will experience sticker shock when they see how much their premiums are about to go up. Democrats will be able to claim they got their point across about the need to rescue Obamacare by extending subsidies that are set to expire," the editorial read.
The third factor, the Post argued, is the idea that Democrats are favored to win most of next Tuesday's elections, most notably the gubernatorial races in New Jersey, Virginia, and New York City. Their possible victory in these elections would give the Democrats the opportunity to save face, even with their shutdown endeavor failing.
"Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries are both New Yorkers who fear the Mamdani wing of the party," they wrote. "Schumer has allowed the shutdown to drag on because he’s worried about fending off a primary challenger in 2028, and he’s still smarting from blowback he got from angry liberals after he agreed to fund the government this spring."
"Keeping the government open should be separated from policy disputes about how to spend taxpayer money," the Post continued. "It is wrong that Democrats have held the government hostage for a month in hopes of extending costly Obamacare subsidies."
In other words, Democrats have crossed a line, from seeking leverage in a policy dispute to directly endangering the well-being of millions of Americans who depend on government programs and funding. Once the federal government is reopened, Republicans must not only stave off calls to increase Obamacare subsidies, but also confront the deeper issue: an overwhelming dependence on government that has left so many Americans vulnerable to political brinkmanship.
The idea that the livelihoods of millions can be held hostage by Washington is a troubling thought, and yet another issue Republicans should seek to address.
Editor’s Note: The Schumer Shutdown is here. Rather than put the American people first, Chuck Schumer and the radical Democrats forced a government shutdown for healthcare for illegals. They own this.
Help us continue to report the truth about the Schumer Shutdown. Use promo code POTUS47 to get 74% off your VIP membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member