As the clock ticks toward a looming government shutdown, tensions in Washington have reached a fever pitch. On September 16, 2025, Senate Democrats announced a bold plan to force votes on President Donald Trump’s controversial tariffs on Canada and Brazil, while simultaneously threatening to block a Republican-backed short-term government funding proposal. With the fate of federal operations and major trade policies hanging in the balance, lawmakers on both sides are digging in for a high-stakes showdown that could have sweeping consequences for the U.S. economy and political landscape.
Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, flanked by a coalition of Democrats and Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, revealed his intention to introduce two bipartisan resolutions in the Senate. These measures aim to terminate the national emergencies President Trump declared to justify imposing tariffs on key trading partners—Canada and Brazil. According to the Associated Press, this maneuver leverages a decades-old law that empowers Congress to challenge a president’s emergency powers and force votes every six months, regardless of whether the Senate majority wishes to avoid the issue.
“Republicans can vote with your constituents or vote with President Trump,” Kaine said, underscoring the political pressure he hopes to exert. “Over time, the instability is creating huge concerns.” He added that he would continue reintroducing these resolutions until the Trump administration’s tariff policy is changed.
The tariffs themselves are rooted in two separate national emergencies. In February 2025, Trump declared an emergency to impose tariffs on Canada, citing what he claimed was insufficient action by Canadian authorities to halt the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S. The tariffs on Brazil are even steeper—50%—and are tied to Brazil’s domestic policies and the criminal prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro. The U.S. imported a range of goods from Brazil in 2024, including orange juice, coffee, iron, and steel, but also ran a $6.8 billion trade surplus with the country, according to U.S. Census Bureau data.
While Kaine’s resolutions are designed to force a reckoning in the Senate, the House of Representatives moved quickly to blunt their impact. Just hours after Kaine’s announcement, House Republicans inserted language into an unrelated bill that temporarily blocks any effort to challenge the tariffs until next year. This means that, even if the Senate passes the resolutions, they’ll be largely symbolic for now.
The economic context only intensifies the debate. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has warned that Trump’s tariff policies are contributing to higher jobless rates, increased inflation, and slower economic growth in 2025. These concerns are echoed by Republicans from agricultural states and others, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota, who said earlier this year, “I think everybody kind of knows my views on tariffs, but the fact of the matter is, the president ran on this.” Despite such reservations, most Republicans have continued to defer to Trump’s approach, arguing he needs time to negotiate deals with individual countries.
Meanwhile, the threat of a government shutdown looms large. The current funding deadline is September 30, 2025, and unless a deal is struck, federal agencies will be forced to close their doors. On Tuesday, House Speaker Mike Johnson and Republican appropriators unveiled a stopgap funding bill to keep the government running through mid-November. The proposal maintains current spending levels and adds more than $80 million for enhanced security for the executive branch, Congress, and the Supreme Court—a response to the recent assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
“Keeping our government open and working for the American people is not a partisan issue — and this clean, short-term funding extension reflects that,” said Congressman Tom Cole, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, in a statement. But Democratic leaders were quick to reject the bill, citing what they see as inadequate healthcare funding and new restrictions on President Trump’s impoundment powers.
Senator Charles Schumer, Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro, Senator Patty Murray, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries all came out in opposition. “The House Republican-only spending bill fails to meet the needs of the American people and does nothing to stop the looming healthcare crisis,” Schumer and Jeffries declared in a joint press release. They pointed specifically to the expiration of Affordable Care Act tax credits—passed during the Biden administration and set to lapse at year’s end—as a major sticking point.
Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Susan Collins expressed some openness to extending those tax credits, but not immediately. “You could wait,” Collins told reporters, suggesting that eligibility criteria could remain steady for another year. However, fellow Republican Senator James Lankford was less conciliatory, telling The New York Sun, “This was a [reform] that was done for Covid. We’re not in a Covid emergency anymore.” He added that he did not view Democrats’ demands as “reasonable.”
The funding bill faces an uphill climb in the Senate, where it needs 60 votes to advance. With Republican Senator Rand Paul already vowing not to support it, the GOP will need at least eight Democrats to cross the aisle. But Democratic unity appears strong, with Senator Brian Schatz—who supported a similar deal in March—declaring on Tuesday that he would not back the new package. “Still have ten days,” Schatz said, “but we’re off to a terrible start because the president said he doesn’t need Democrats and he wants to shut us out.”
The political stakes are high not just for the immediate future, but for the 2026 Senate races as well. Illinois Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton, a leading Democratic candidate, called on her party to block the funding deal, arguing, “What we’re about to see play out in Washington, D.C. is not a normal budget showdown because Donald Trump is not a normal president. Donald Trump and congressional Republicans have never, and never will, negotiate in good faith.” Other Democratic Senate hopefuls have echoed this sentiment, with some even suggesting that Senate Minority Leader Schumer should be replaced if he allows another GOP-authored spending bill to pass.
All of this comes on the heels of a turbulent spring, when Schumer and nine other Senate Democrats voted to advance a Republican spending deal—despite the measure receiving only one Democratic vote in the House. That move dented Schumer’s standing within his own caucus and has fueled calls for new leadership as the party heads into a contentious election cycle.
With the September 30 deadline fast approaching, it’s clear that both the tariffs dispute and the funding impasse are more than mere policy disagreements. They are flashpoints in an ongoing battle over the direction of U.S. economic and political life. Lawmakers on both sides are being forced to choose between party loyalty, constituent interests, and the broader national good—a balancing act that could define the remainder of 2025 and beyond.
As procedural chess plays out on Capitol Hill, the American public and businesses are left watching anxiously, bracing for the potential fallout from stalled trade, rising prices, and a possible government shutdown. The outcome of these standoffs will likely shape not just the next few months, but the tenor of the nation’s politics for years to come.
