Valentine’s Day on Capitol Hill Overshadowed by Political Uncertainty

“We’ll have the votes,” House Speaker Mike Johnson confidently declared as the House approached a crucial vote to end a three-day partial government shutdown Tuesday morning. While Johnson’s prediction ultimately proved correct, the path to passing the retooled spending package was anything but smooth.

The House Republican leadership, operating with a razor-thin majority of 218-214, faced significant challenges in securing enough support to adopt both the procedural rule and the final spending bill. The preliminary procedural vote, traditionally a routine matter, has increasingly become a battleground where conservative members express dissatisfaction with party leadership.

Rep. Kat Cammack (R-Fla.) accurately forecasted the drama when she told Fox News, “That’s where you’re going to see some friction.” House Democrats, meanwhile, refused to help Republicans adopt the rule, with Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries asserting, “On rare occasion, have we stepped in to deal with Republican dysfunction.”

The procedural vote quickly became tense when Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) voted against it, followed by Rep. John Rose (R-Tenn.). With the House’s narrow partisan split, Republicans could only afford one defection if all members voted. Two defections would result in a 216-216 tie, which by House rules would mean defeat.

Rose, who is challenging Sen. Marsha Blackburn for Tennessee’s governorship, demanded attaching the SAVE Act—requiring proof of citizenship to vote—to the spending bill. However, including such a provision would have prolonged the shutdown, as the Senate and House would remain out of alignment with no path to break a potential filibuster in the Senate.

The vote stalled at 216 nays to 212 yeas, with four Republicans still not having voted: Reps. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.), Byron Donalds (R-Fla.), Troy Nehls (R-Texas), and Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.). Republican leadership needed all four to vote yes, plus either Massie or Rose to change their votes.

After intensive negotiations on the House floor, Donalds and Spartz voted in favor, followed by Nehls. Rose then switched his vote to yes, and Ogles finally voted affirmatively as well. Rep. G.T. Thompson (R-Penn.), presiding over the vote, closed it at 217-215, with Massie remaining the lone Republican dissenter.

The final vote on the spending bill itself was equally dramatic, passing narrowly at 217-214. While 21 Republicans voted against the measure, 21 Democrats broke with their party to vote in favor, providing the critical margin for passage. Had just two more members voted no, the bill would have failed, and the shutdown would have continued.

“We have fully 96% of the federal government funded. So that’s a good win,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) declared, though this achievement came more than four months after Congress was supposed to have completed the entire funding process.

The remaining 4% represents the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which received only short-term funding until February 14. Democrats are demanding changes at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) before approving longer-term funding, setting up another potential shutdown showdown.

“A shutdown of Homeland Security. I’m okay with that,” stated Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Penn.), signaling Democrats’ willingness to hold firm on their immigration-related demands.

While TSA employees and other DHS workers would still receive pay under the current arrangement, they face continued uncertainty. “You will be paid because this continues your pay. But the uncertainty—until we get this resolved—you must live with,” warned Rep. Ed Case (D-Hawaii).

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the top Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee, was among the 193 Democrats who opposed the bill, viewing it as “an opportunity to demonstrate your opposition.” By contrast, former House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), representing thousands of federal workers near the nation’s capital, was one of the 21 Democrats who voted to reopen the government.

Negotiating an agreement on such contentious issues within the Valentine’s Day deadline presents a significant challenge. House and Senate Democrats plan to release their specific demands on Thursday, while Republicans have their own priorities.

“I’m not willing to just give them every reform they ask for. Or even some without getting some reforms ourselves,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), with some Republicans pushing to end sanctuary cities or include the SAVE Act.

Speaker Johnson accused Democrats of playing “a very dangerous game” if they attempt to keep government agencies closed. Meanwhile, Leader Jeffries declared himself “a hard no on a year-long CR” for DHS, reiterating “the deadline is February 13th.”

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the leading Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, expressed optimism, saying, “You can get to where you want to go if you have the will to get there,” confirming there would be “a vote” related to DHS funding by February 13.

However, Senator Thune suggested Democrats may be deliberately creating “a political issue” for the midterms, noting that “trying to do this with a two-week deadline makes no sense.”

With Valentine’s Day looming as the next funding cliff, Congress faces another high-stakes negotiation with deeply entrenched positions on both sides of the immigration debate.