It was Will Rogers, I believe, who said: “I don’t belong to any political party. I’m a Democrat.” This is because the Democratic Party was always a big tent party, then with southern segregationists and New York socialists, banded together to keep this country from the grips of big business. Times have changed – and you can’t even tell which party is more in the grips of big business – but once again we have the specter of a unified Republican Party under the absolute control of its Dear Leader, and a Democratic Party divided as to how it should be dealing with the current government shutdown and divided as to whether its current leadership is right for the times and up for the challenge.

Of course all of this is happening while the country is reeling under a government whose three branches are all controlled by the Republicans, and a country, as was shown last Tuesday (seems like a month ago already), ready to kick the GOP out of office wherever the opportunity arises.

I happen to think that the eight Democratic senators who voted with the Republicans to end the shutdown were correct. There are those who say that they were traitors to the cause of extending the ACA subsidies and other health care benefits set to expire, but their conclusion was that the Republicans were not going to give up on these points, and that the shutdown was going to drag too many people down, as SNAP benefits were being slashed, air traffic controllers and others not being paid, and much, much more.

But it is also true that the eight senators did not simply roll over. They obtained a number of benefits – reopening the government being an important one. Another was the reinstatement of all federal employees who have been fired or furloughed during the shutdown, with a promise not to fire or furlough any more federal employees before the end of January. It also guarantees that all federal employees, those required to work without pay during the shutdown and those laid off during the shutdown, will get full back pay.

The government is now funded until January 30, 2026, and three appropriations bills for the entire fiscal year, previously approved, are presumably now ready for signature, with time to finish the other FY 2026 appropriations bills. Before now,  appropriations for the past year would have ended before Thanksgiving, ten days from today. And SNAP payments, along with appropriations for various other essential programs, have now been assured through September 2026.

The big question, of course, not answered by the proposed legislation ending the shutdown relates to the health care subsidies and related matters. This was the reason given by the Senate Democrats for refusing to agree to appropriations bills for other agencies for FY 2026, and this is what led to the shutdown. Now, the only progress on this crucial point is that Majority Leader Thune has agreed with the Democrats that he will allow a vote on a bill, prepared by the Democrats, to extend the subsidies. The bill has not yet been written; I don’t think that the timing is clear. And, of course, any such bill, written by the minority party, would require a 60-40 vote to pass, and that outcome now seems pretty unlikely. In addition, such a bill would of course also have to be approved by the House of Representatives, and Majority Leader Johnson has not committed even to allow such a vote.

So the question is: if the eight Democrats had not voted to end the shutdown and had the shutdown continued, would the Republicans have buckled under and reached a compromise, or not? My guess is that they would not have, or at best would have suggested an incomplete compromise only after the shutdown had brought much more suffering (in some ways hard to imagine) to the country, and that by then blame for the shutdown would be placed at least as much on the Democrats as on the Republicans. Now, the polls show the Republicans bearing most of the blame, and that calculus is important with the midterms coming up now in less than a year.

And, of course, negotiations on the future of the Obamacare subsidies are not dead. They will have to be settled by the end of January or, who knows, another shutdown may occur. And the negotiations won’t be undertaken with a fear that premiums will go up in the future (the date being Jan 1?), but with premiums already having risen. Presumably, that will put more pressure on the Republicans to compromise, or will sway the electorate even more towards the Democrats.

Ken Martin seems to be doing a good job as chair of the Democratic National Committee (based on November 4 results). Hopefully, he will weigh in and be listened to.

In the meantime, leadership of the Democrats is in question. I have said several times on this blog that both Schumer and Jeffries need to be replaced by more charismatic individuals, and by people who do not talk with New York City accents. This is not because I hold anything against either of them; I just don’t think they are right for the job today. There are several Democratic legislators saying the same thing now. Of course, this does make the party look like it is divided (and perhaps to some extent it is), and I believe it is up to current leadership to end that divide by stepping aside. I also think that it is important that this happens now, not later. Why? Easy. There is a must-win election coming up next November, and the Democrats need to put their best feet forward. They must be united, and they should not present themselves with outmoded or lame duck leadership.