President Trump speaks to reporters amid a government shutdown on January 3, 2019.(Reuters / Carlos Barria)
The public has so far given Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans the lion’s share of the blame for the longest government shutdown in US history. That’s understandable given that Trump kicked it off by saying on nationwide television that he alone would take responsibility for locking out federal workers if he didn’t get $5.7 billion for a wall that—remember!—he originally said he would strong-arm Mexico into financing within his first three days in office.
We should be grateful for Trump’s incapacity for message discipline, because the traditional media are once again failing to convey what’s going on in Washington. The instinct to cover a standoff like this one as an example of partisan bickering runs deep, but that framing obscures the utter absurdity of this shutdown. Yet again, we’re seeing deeply embedded conventions of neutral political journalism effectively normalizing what are really an incoherent series of moves by an erratic president—abuses of power that are now causing deep and potentially lasting damage to the economy.
If you tune in to cable news, or check the latest at outlets like Politico or The Hill, you’ll learn which party has the upper hand in the polls, which caucus is feeling more restive or more confident and analysis of the latest proposals to bring it to an end. And you will hear, repeatedly, that this is a standoff over $5.7 billion for Trump’s border wall.
That’s not what this is about, or not primarily. It is true that the Democratic base is dead-set against funding Trump’s wall, but Democratic leaders have made it clear that they think that if Trump gets his way under these circumstances, they’ll face two years trying to govern with a president who’s learned he can force his way by taking hostages according to the whims of conservative media personalities. “We cannot have the president, every time he has an objection, to say I’ll shut down the government until you come to my way of thinking,” said Nancy Pelosi this week. “If we hold [federal] employees hostage now, they’re hostage forever.”
That’s really what’s at stake with this shutdown. It’s a test of whether Trump can wrap his head around the fact that Congress is a co-equal branch of government. Trump doesn’t want to fold because it would bruise his ego; Democrats can’t fold without undermining the separation of powers for the remainder of Trump’s presidency.
And contrary to what you may believe from dozens of headlines and hundreds of cable news segments, Trump did not offer the Democrats a deal to reopen the government last Friday. He wants to build a giant wall on the southern border, which Democrats oppose. He reiterated his demand for $5.7 billion to pay for it, but he offered nothing that Democrats want and Republicans oppose in return.
Trump said he’d extend protections to the Dreamers for three years and continue to offer temporary legal status to some groups who were forced by conflict or natural disasters to flee their home countries , but both of those programs have long enjoyed broad bipartisan support. And as Elie Mystal pointed out over the weekend, Trump’s assaults on both programs are currently blocked by the courts anyway, and observers don’t expect those cases to be resolved anytime soon.
Some short-term protections for people Trump put in peril in the first place, without a single concession to the Democrats’ agenda, is not an offer to break a partisan stalemate, and shouldn’t be portrayed as such by the press.
That’s not all. For the first 30 days of the shutdown, there was no legislative proposal for lawmakers to consider. The White House has repeatedly refused Democrats’ requests to specify how those $5.7 billion would be spent. It’s not even clear where that number came from. During the campaign, Trump estimated his wall would costs $12 billion. Other estimates range between $15 and $70 billion, according to a report by the Brookings Institution.
(Keep in mind that the Trump regime has only spent 60 percent of what Congress allocated for border security in the 2017 and 2018 budgets, according to an analysis by PolitiFact. And again, this is all over a stop-gap spending measure.)
On Monday night, day 31 of the shutdown, Republicans finally issued a concrete legislative proposal to consider, and as Greg Sargent reported for The Washington Post, it was “so loaded up with poison pills that it looks as if it was deliberately constructed to make it impossible for Democrats to support.” In the fine print are provisions that would make it all but impossible for minors from Central America to seek asylum in the United States and would bar people from Africa and Asia from seeking temporary status due to emergencies. David Bier, a conservative immigration expert at the Cato Institute, wrote on Twitter that the provisions were so restrictive that the “media should stop reporting that the bill would extend” the program. It would also double the application fees for Dreamers, and impose new income requirements for them to stay in the only country many of them have known.
I know that many important organizations are asking you to donate today, but this year especially, The Nation needs your support.
Over the course of 2025, the Trump administration has presided over a government designed to chill activism and dissent.
The Nation experienced its efforts to destroy press freedom firsthand in September, when Vice President JD Vance attacked our magazine. Vance was following Donald Trump’s lead—waging war on the media through a series of lawsuits against publications and broadcasters, all intended to intimidate those speaking truth to power.
The Nation will never yield to these menacing currents. We have survived for 160 years and we will continue challenging new forms of intimidation, just as we refused to bow to McCarthyism seven decades ago. But in this frightening media environment, we’re relying on you to help us fund journalism that effectively challenges Trump’s crude authoritarianism.
For today only, a generous donor is matching all gifts to The Nation up to $25,000. If we hit our goal this Giving Tuesday, that’s $50,000 for journalism with a sense of urgency.
With your support, we’ll continue to publish investigations that expose the administration’s corruption, analysis that sounds the alarm on AI’s unregulated capture of the military, and profiles of the inspiring stories of people who successfully take on the ICE terror machine.
We’ll also introduce you to the new faces and ideas in this progressive moment, just like we did with New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani. We will always believe that a more just tomorrow is in our power today.
Please, don’t miss this chance to double your impact. Donate to The Nation today.
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Editor and publisher, The Nation
Media reports rarely remind readers how we got here. Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell has said consistently that he won’t bring bills to the floor unless Trump says he would sign them into law. On December 19, with Trump’s approval, the Senate unanimously passed a short-term spending measure without wall funding. Senators went home for the holidays, assured that the House would pass their measure and longer-term negotiations would begin in the new year. But Ann Coulter rebelled, and Trump shut down the government to keep his base close. (“Trump can withstand Ann Coulter,” an unnamed GOP Senator told Axios this week, but “he can’t lose Hannity and the rest.”)
Trump’s entire justification for shutting the government down in December was that he’d have less leverage to negotiate with Democrats after they took control of the House on January 3. The only rationale he’s offered for keeping the shutdown going now is that he can’t give his political opponents a perceived win. It’s an outrageous justification for a shutdown that’s not only left 800,000 federal workers in a desperate lurch but is threatening our national security. According to reports, nobody knows what Trump’s strategy for getting out of this mess is, including his own aides.
It should go without saying that none of this is normal. And that is really what keeps tripping up reporters. If they flesh out this context in their reporting, it would paint one side of this “stalemate” as an irrational actor, which would invite accusations of “liberal bias.” The alternative is to adhere to established journalistic conventions, treat an incoherent tantrum-fueled shutdown as a normal partisan standoff, and leave the public with an incomplete picture of what’s going on.
Joshua HollandTwitterJoshua Holland is a contributor to The Nation. He’s also the host of Politics and Reality Radio.