Categories
Featured Juneau News Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Federal government shutdown begins, with no easy exit in sight

By: Jennifer Shutt and Ariana Figueroa, States Newsroom

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, center, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

This report has been updated.

WASHINGTON — The federal government started shutting down early Wednesday after Congress failed to approve a funding bill before the beginning of the new fiscal year — resulting in widespread ramifications for hundreds of programs and giving the Trump administration an avenue to fire federal workers en masse.

The U.S. Senate was unable to advance two short-term government funding bills Tuesday when Democrats and Republicans deadlocked for the second time this month, with just hours to go before the midnight Tuesday shutdown deadline.

Senators voted 55-45 on Republicans’ bill that would fund the government for seven weeks and 47-53 on a Democratic stopgap proposal that would keep the lights on for a month and included several health care provisions that they said were needed for their support. Neither had the 60 votes needed to advance. 

Nevada Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, Pennsylvania Democratic Sen. John Fetterman and Maine independent Sen. Angus King voted with GOP senators on their stopgap bill. Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul voted against it.

White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought said in a memo to departments and agencies Tuesday night after the Senate vote that “affected agencies should now execute their plans for an orderly shutdown.” Vought said federal employees should report for their next regularly scheduled tour of duty to undertake shutdown activities.

The consequences of a shutdown will be sweeping in the nation’s capital and across the country, where states are bracing for the impact. About 750,000 federal workers could be furloughed, leading to a $400 million impact a day, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported. All federal employees would go unpaid until the shutdown is over.

Additionally, the Trump administration plans to lay off thousands of federal employees, which would reshape the federal workforce. President Donald Trump again vowed Tuesday to undertake layoffs and a major government employee union filed suit in federal court in advance of such a move.

More votes on GOP bill planned

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said hours before the votes there wouldn’t be any talks with Democrats during a shutdown. 

“The negotiation happens when the government is open. So let’s keep the government open and then we will have the negotiations,” Thune said. 

“We’re happy to sit down and talk about these issues that they’re interested in,” he said. “But it should not have anything to do with whether or not for a seven-week period we keep the government open, so that this government can continue to do its work and that we can do our work through the regular appropriations process to fund the government.” 

After the votes failed, Thune expressed his frustration with Democrats during a press conference. 

“This is so unnecessary and uncalled for,” he said. 

Thune said he plans to bring up a vote on the continuing resolution again. He said as soon as Wednesday the federal government can be funded if five Democrats voted with Republicans. 

“Democrats may have chosen to shut down the government, but we can reopen it tomorrow,” Thune said. 

Republican Whip John Barrasso of Wyoming said the “cracks in the Democrats are already showing,” noting that three Democrats voted with Republicans Tuesday night. 

“There is bipartisan support for keeping the government open,” Barrasso said. “We’re happy to see that the Democrats are already starting to break from (Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer) and we’re going to continue to offer a clean (continuing resolution) on the floor of the Senate to open the government for the next seven weeks.”

Health care tax credits at center of standoff

The disagreement isn’t entirely about GOP lawmakers writing their short-term funding bill behind closed doors and then expecting Democrats to help advance it in the Senate, where bipartisanship is required for major legislation.

Democratic leaders have raised concerns for weeks about the end-of-year sunset of enhanced tax credits for people who buy their health insurance on the Affordable Care Act Marketplace, arguing a solution is needed now ahead of the open enrollment period starting on Nov. 1. 

Congressional Black Caucus Chair Yvette Clarke, a New York Democrat, speaks at a press conference outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 30, 2025. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)
Congressional Black Caucus Chair Yvette Clarke, a New York Democrat, speaks at a press conference outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 30, 2025. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

Democrats have also grown increasingly frustrated with the White House budget office’s unilateral actions on spending, arguing Vought is significantly eroding Congress’ constitutional power of the purse. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, the Republican chairwoman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, said Tuesday the Government Accountability Office should sue the Trump administration over its efforts to freeze or unilaterally cancel spending approved by Congress. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Democrats need an agreement with Republicans to extend the enhanced tax credits. 

Schumer said people will begin getting notices in October telling them how much the cost of their ACA plans will increase during the next year, which he expects will ratchet up pressure on Republican leaders to broker a bipartisan agreement. 

“We’re going to be right there explaining to them it’s because the Republicans wouldn’t negotiate with us,” Schumer said, referring to consumers. “We’re ready to do it anytime. And there will be huge heat on (Republicans) on this issue.”

People who buy health insurance on the ACA marketplace and receive subsidies through enhanced ACA tax credits could expect to pay on average more than double for annual premiums in 2026 if the credits expire as scheduled at the end of this year, according to an analysis released Tuesday by the nonprofit health policy research organization KFF. 

The analysis found premiums could increase from an average of $888 this year to $1,904 in 2026.

Claims about immigrants 

Schumer also rebuffed GOP leaders saying that Democrats want to include people without legal immigration status in federal health care programs. 

“They say that undocumented people are going to get these credits. That is absolutely false. That is one of the big lies they tell, so they don’t have to discuss the issues,” Schumer said. “The federal government by law that we passed does not fund health insurance for undocumented immigrants in Medicaid, nor the ACA nor Medicare. Undocumented immigrants do not get federal health insurance premiums.” 

Immigrants in the country without legal authorization are not eligible for Medicaid, and neither are most immigrants with legal status, such as those with student visas or enrollment in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, known as DACA. 

Only immigrants with a “qualified status,” such as legal permanent residents, asylees and refugees, are able to get Medicaid benefits, and they usually have to wait five years before their coverage can even begin. 

Democrats explain why they voted with GOP 

Cortez Masto of Nevada wrote in a statement explaining her vote to advance the GOP stopgap bill that she could not support “a costly shutdown that would hurt Nevada families and hand even more power to this reckless administration.”

“We need a bipartisan solution to address this impending health care crisis, but we should not be swapping the pain of one group of Americans for another,” she added. “I remain focused on protecting health care for working families, and I call on my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to work together to tackle this problem.”

Pennsylvania’s Fetterman wrote in a statement of his own that his vote on the Republican bill “was for our country over my party.

“Together, we must find a better way forward.”

Collins said during a brief interview before the vote she is worried about the broad authority the White House holds during a shutdown and how the Office of Management and Budget has indicated it will use that power. 

“I’m much more concerned about OMB sending signals that there should be mass firings of federal employees who have the misfortune to be designated as non-essential, when in fact they’re performing very essential work, they’re just not being paid,” Collins said.  

North Dakota Republican Sen. John Hoeven, chairman of the Agriculture spending subcommittee, said lawmakers will have to sort through how various departments implement their contingency plans as well as the possibility of mass layoffs during a shutdown. 

“We’ll have to work through those things and figure out how we do keep things going as best we can during this Democrat shutdown,” Hoeven said.

West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito said Republicans are “unified in the belief that this is an easy choice” to fund the government with a stopgap bill that doesn’t include any contentious or political provisions. 

Capito — who chairs the Appropriations subcommittee that funds the departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Labor — said there are several programs that will be “missed” during a shutdown. 

“And that’s concerning. So I think the option is to keep the government open so we can avoid this pain,” Capito said. 

‘I’m not optimistic that we’re going to get a path forward’

Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley said he is worried about the possible impacts of a shutdown on his home state and that keeping the government open is the only way to avoid that.  

“I’m sure the administration will do everything they can,” Hawley said. “But the solution is to not shut the government down. I mean, why would you punish working people because you’re not getting what you want on any issue, whatever it is.”

South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds said he doesn’t expect a shutdown will end until after Democrats have sent a message to their voters. 

“I’m not optimistic that we’re going to get a path forward until they’ve had a shutdown,” he said. 

Rounds, who negotiated a handshake agreement with the White House budget director this summer to preserve some funding for rural tribal radio stations after Congress eliminated funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, said that deal could be affected by a shutdown. 

“They’re putting the administration in a position where they can pick and choose what they’re going to do, and a shutdown is not going to be beneficial to these Native American radio stations,” Rounds said. 

Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan said she wants Democrats and Republicans to negotiate on health care provisions.

“I’ve been making the case constantly, that (it) is literally my obligation to try and fight for health care, and I’m willing to talk to anyone,” she said. “I’m willing to accept that I certainly will not get everything I want.”

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois said that while Democrats agreed to help advance what’s known as a continuing resolution in March, they can’t now because of “what President Trump is doing to this country, particularly when it comes to health care costs for families.”  

The shutdown will significantly affect the operations of the federal government as lawmakers have not passed any of the dozen full-year appropriations bills that finance agency operations. Oct. 1 is the beginning of the new fiscal year for the federal government.

Shutdown plan for national parks

Departments began releasing updated contingency plans this weekend, detailing how many of their employees would work during a government shutdown and how many would be furloughed.

The Interior Department, which includes the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service, posted its updated plans late Tuesday. 

The National Park Service plans to furlough 9,300 of its 14,500 workers. 

The Trump administration will allow several activities necessary for the protection of life or property to continue, including fire suppression for active fires, permitting and monitoring First Amendment activities, border and coastal protection and surveillance, and law enforcement and emergency response.

The contingency plan says that roads, lookouts, trails, and open-air memorials will generally remain accessible to visitors,” but it adds that if “access becomes a safety, health or resource protection issue … the area must be closed.”

Union files suit

In anticipation of layoffs by the Trump administration, labor unions representing more than 1 million federal workers filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of California on Tuesday to block the Trump administration from carrying out mass firings. The suit argues that there is no statutory authority to fire federal employees during a government shutdown.

“These actions are contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious, and the cynical use of federal employees as a pawn in Congressional deliberations should be declared unlawful and enjoined by this Court,” according to the suit filed by the American Federation of Government Employees and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

Ashley Murray and Shauneen Miranda contributed to this report. 

Categories
Featured Juneau News Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Republican attorneys general say they see a threat from Democratic states’ climate laws and lawsuits

By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

Attorneys general (from left to right) Treg Taylor of Alaska, Marty Jackley of South Dakota, Kris Kobach of Kansas, J.B. McCuskey of West Virginia, and Liz Murrill of Louisiana participate in a panel discussion on Thursday, Aug. 28, 2025, at the Alaska Oil and Gas Association conference in Anchorage. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)

During a pair of public panel discussions during the last week of August, attorneys general from five conservative Republican states said they see climate ‘superfund laws’ passed by Democratic states as major threats to the fossil fuel industries of their state.

“I think that the group of people that are on this panel are all united in making sure that all of the expertise in all of our offices are being utilized to make sure that this doesn’t keep going, because it’s very, very dangerous,” said J.B. McCuskey, attorney general of West Virginia, at the annual meeting of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association.

Alongside him were attorneys general Kris Kobach of Kansas, Liz Murrill of Louisiana, Marty Jackley of South Dakota, and then-attorney general of Alaska, Treg Taylor.

The attorneys general said they are also concerned by lawsuits from states and local governments that could result in financial penalties against fossil fuel companies for disasters attributed to climate change.

Vermont made history in 2024 when it enacted a law that allows the state to hold fossil fuel companies financially liable for the negative impacts of climate change on that state. New York followed suit with a similar law later in the year. 

Under both laws, fines levied by the states and paid by fossil fuel companies would go into a large fund that would be spent on projects that could mitigate natural disasters or subsidize clean energy projects.

Other Democratic-led states, including Massachusetts, New Jersey and California, are considering similar laws.

“Now that we have a friendly EPA and a friendly administration, the blue states are deciding that they’re now going to be the EPA,” McCuskey said, speaking at a different panel hosted by the Republican Women of Anchorage. 

The attorneys general, plus Ken Paxton of Texas, who was not present at the industry panel, nodded along as McCuskey spoke.

“Their argument is that every single permitted operation that happened in Alaska caused $75 billion worth of damage to the people of New York. It’s completely outrageous. And the problem isn’t just that it’s New York, it’s that Illinois has one. California is going to have one. Vermont’s going to have one. Massachusetts is going to have one. You name a place that has radical environmentalists running their government, and then it becomes an amount of money that’s not withstandable,” McCuskey said.

Taylor, who has since resigned as Alaska’s attorney general and is expected to run for governor, said he believes that in states with budget holes, “it’s pretty convenient just to raise taxes on oil and gas, right? And those states that don’t have oil and gas, that’s their way of dealing with their budget shortfalls, is to take it out of oil and gas through these types of acts.”

Republican attorneys general from five states speak at an event hosted by the Anchorage Republican Women on Thursday, Aug. 28, 2025, in Anchorage. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
Republican attorneys general from five states speak at an event hosted by the Anchorage Republican Women on Thursday, Aug. 28, 2025, in Anchorage. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)

Fossil fuel businesses and trade groups, including the American Petroleum Institute and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, filed suit last year against the Vermont law. 

A group of Republican attorneys general, led by McCuskey, sued New York in February. Another McCuskey-led suit, filed in May, targets Vermont

The Trump administration has also gotten involved by filing lawsuits against both states and against states like Hawaii that have filed lawsuits against fossil fuel companies.

Those suits say companies should be financially liable for harm caused by climate change.

Speaking at the Alaska oil panel, Kobach said he’s concerned about climate lawsuits filed by cities and counties and believes they’re being encouraged by national environmental law firms and groups.

“The reason I’m so energized about fighting back against that is Ford County, Kansas, which you probably never heard of, where Dodge City is — little tiny county, rural county, very low population — somehow, they were convinced by some very well-heeled attorneys in California to be a plaintiff in one of these lawsuits. And so we’re chasing them around. My office is chasing them around, trying to get them kicked out of court because they don’t speak for the people of Kansas,” he said.

Taylor said he sees the same issue.

“We’re seeing those opportunistic plaintiffs’ attorneys convince municipalities and boroughs and cities to take on litigation that’s really not in their best interest and really puts money into their own pockets,” he said during the panel discussion.

McCuskey, of West Virginia, said his state is considering a law that would restrict the ability of local governments to sue.

Nationally, the fossil fuel industry is lobbying Congress to pass a liability shield law akin to the one passed in 2005 to protect the gun industry against lawsuits attempting to hold gun manufacturers responsible for gun crimes. 

In June, McCuskey and other attorneys general wrote a letter to the U.S. Attorney General to offer support for a national liability shield to protect fossil fuel companies. 

The National Association of Counties and the National League of Cities have each adopted resolutions opposing such a liability shield. Both organizations say that local governments should retain the power to file lawsuits.

McCuskey, speaking at the oil panel, got a laugh from the audience when he asked attendees what they thought West Virginians would say if New York tried to collect a fine from the state of West Virginia.

“Our big joke is that the people in New York are literally looking down on us from the skyscrapers that were built with coal from West Virginia,” McCuskey said at the oil and gas association panel. “So they’re not just looking down on us figuratively, but both literally and figuratively, and they just have no contemplation of why their economies were built by the people who do the work that’s happening here.”