Let’s put politics aside, as if that were possible, and look at how the craziness of the last few days is affecting people.

A week ago, President Donald Trump announced that the 42 million Americans on the SNAP nutrition program would not be getting their benefits — this against the backdrop of a government shutdown that has now reached its 40th day.

This against the backdrop of millions of federal workers who have not been paid while the shutdown drags on — and many of whom live paycheck to paycheck.

This against the backdrop of Trump throwing a lavish, Great Gatsby-themed Mar-a-Lago bash where guests in formal wear watched opera and feasted on blue cheese mousse, sliced beef filet, seared scallops and Trump chocolate cake.

Meanwhile, a federal judge ordered the administration to resume SNAP benefits, which cost $8.5 billion a month, but the Supreme Court gave Trump time to appeal.

And when at least nine states said they would pay for SNAP benefits during the crisis, Trump ordered them to ‘immediately undo’ any effort to provide food stamps to lower-income families — or face financial penalties.

Let’s see: how does this make the president look?

I hate this word, but what are the optics of this determined effort to stop these benefits from reaching hungry families?

After all, when a wealthy donor pal, Timothy Mellon, a banking and railroad heir, offered $130 million to ensure that American troops get paid during the shutdown, Trump seized the opportunity.

After all, the Trump tax cut was tilted toward the wealthy.

After all, Trump has further cut capital gains taxes on home sales that will mostly benefit the affluent and wealthy, enabling many to pay zero, or a reduced rate, on these sales. If you are totally unaware of this, you probably don’t qualify.

After all — this may have been the weirdest thing — Trump said Obamacare is so terrible that he wants to send people $2,000 checks so they can buy their own insurance.

But, where would they buy it, if not from an insurance company? And what would they do if the stock market plunged? There’s a reason that privatization of health insurance has never gone anywhere.

So to come back to politics (inevitably), how does any of this help Trump?

I get the notion that he’s trying to boost the pain level so that Democrats will end the shutdown on his terms.

The Democrats, who have made soaring Obamacare premiums a central part of their pitch — and fear millions will lose coverage unless expiring subsidies are extended — have hung on longer than anyone expected.

For what it’s worth, both sides deserve a ton of blame for failing to keep the lights on during this endless blame game, rather than work out a compromise, which is what we pay them to do.

But don’t Trump and JD Vance, who called the judge’s order ‘absurd,’ look like they don’t particularly care if millions of families go hungry, or are taking food from dumpsters?

Seriously, is there an alternative explanation?

Blaming the other side is fine for the usual political fun and games. But doing it during this kind of self-inflicted crisis?

With the opposition throwing out charges of cruelty, is there some nine — dimensional chess level on which this helps Trump?

Trump says former President Joe Biden ‘went totally crazy’ and handed out food stamps to ‘anybody that would ask.’ So is this liberalism gone wild? I decided to do a little digging.

Turns out there are income limits, and those in the program must meet work requirements. What’s more, the oft-repeated charge that illegal immigrants are getting SNAP benefits is simply untrue, though there are exemptions for children and refugees. (Obviously, you can never completely rule out instances of fraud.)

During the pandemic, when unemployment soared, Congress passed an emergency measure that temporarily suspended a work requirement for adults without dependents who were capable of holding jobs. This happened under … President Trump, in his first term, in 2020.

Under a deal with Republicans in 2023, work requirements for SNAP were increased. That happened under … Biden. Some Republicans, meanwhile, said the measure didn’t go far enough.

By the way, SNAP participation peaked in the fall of 2017, under Trump, which was related to hurricane emergencies.

Sorry for the green-eyeshade stuff, but I thought it was worth more research.

Most people don’t have the time or interest in excavating the details. They just know they aren’t getting the food aid they expected and that neither are millions of other lower-income families. And especially with his dogged determination to block the states from helping out, many are holding Trump accountable.

A federal judge appointed by former President Ronald Reagan announced in an op-ed published Sunday that he resigned from his position, relinquishing his lifetime appointment to speak out against President Donald Trump, whom he views as eroding judicial independence and using the law to reward allies and punish opponents.

Mark Wolf, who was appointed by Reagan in 1985, said in The Atlantic that he had looked forward to serving on the bench for the rest of his life but felt compelled to resign.

‘My reason is simple: I no longer can bear to be restrained by what judges can say publicly or do outside the courtroom. President Donald Trump is using the law for partisan purposes, targeting his adversaries while sparing his friends and donors from investigation, prosecution, and possible punishment,’ he wrote.

‘This is contrary to everything that I have stood for in my more than 50 years in the Department of Justice and on the bench. The White House’s assault on the rule of law is so deeply disturbing to me that I feel compelled to speak out. Silence, for me, is now intolerable.’

The former federal judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts said he began his career in public service at the Department of Justice in 1974, several years after the Watergate scandal.

Wolf served under former President Gerald Ford’s Attorney General Edward Levi, who he argued helped shape his views on what it means to uphold the rule of law and to seek justice in a nonpartisan way.

‘I decided all of my cases based on the facts and the law, without regard to politics, popularity, or my personal preferences. That is how justice is supposed to be administered—equally for everyone, without fear or favor. This is the opposite of what is happening now,’ he wrote.

Wolf’s successor was selected and nominated after he became a senior judge in 2013, and the seat was officially filled by Judge Indira Talwani in 2014.

‘I hope to be a spokesperson for embattled judges who, consistent with the code of conduct, feel they cannot speak candidly to the American people,’ he told The New York Times.

White House deputy press secretary Abigail Jackson told the Times that judges who look to ‘inject their own personal agenda into the law have no place on the bench.’ 

‘Any other radical judges that want to complain to the press should at least have the decency to resign before doing so,’ she said.

The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is glad the Senate finally managed to break through its weeks-long standoff on the government shutdown, he told Fox News Digital on Monday morning.

‘It’s a great development. It’s long overdue. It vindicates our position in this all along,’ the House leader said.

He added that he would have ‘a lot more to say at a press conference this morning.’

Asked how soon the House would return to session, Johnson said, ‘Immediately.’

‘We’re going to get everybody back on a 36-hour notice, so it’ll be happening early this week,’ Johnson said.

The House has not been in session since Sept. 19, when lawmakers there first passed a bill to avert a shutdown by extending current federal funding levels through Nov. 21. Democrats rejected that deal, however, kicking off weeks of a worsening impasse where millions of Americans’ federal benefits and air travel were put at risk.

Eight Senate Democrats joined all but one Senate Republican in breaking a filibuster to advance an updated government funding deal late on Sunday night.

It came on Day 40 of the government shutdown — which already holds the record for being the longest shutdown in U.S. history.

Terms of the deal include a new extension of fiscal year (FY) 2025 federal funding levels through Jan. 30, in order to give congressional negotiators more time to strike a longer-term deal on FY 2026 spending.

It would also give lawmakers some headway with that mission, advancing legislation to fund the Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration; the Department of Veterans Affairs and military construction; and the legislative branch.

They are three of 12 individual bills that are meant to make up Congress’ annual appropriations, paired into a vehicle called a ‘minibus.’

In a victory for Democrats, the deal would also reverse federal layoffs conducted by the Trump administration in October, with those workers getting paid for the time they were off.

It also guarantees Senate Democrats a vote on legislation extending Obamacare subsidies that were enhanced during the COVID-19 pandemic, which are set to expire at the end of this year.

Extending the enhanced Obamacare subsidies was a key ask for Democrats in the weeks-long standoff.

No such guarantee was made in the House, however, so Democrats effectively folded on their key demand in order to end the shutdown — a move that infuriated progressives in Congress.

With a deal to end the record government shutdown taking shape, President Donald Trump is turning to foreign policy at the start of the week.

On Monday, Trump will host Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa at the White House, the first official visit by a Syrian leader to Washington. Officials describe the meeting as a landmark attempt to bring Damascus back into the diplomatic fold after years on the international sidelines.

It will be the third meeting between Trump and al-Sharaa this year, as Syria’s new leadership works to rebuild a shattered nation and restore ties with Arab states and the West following the end of Bashar al-Assad’s 14-year civil war.

In a move paving the way for the talks, Washington eased key restrictions on Syria’s leadership ahead of the meeting.

On Friday, the United States lifted sanctions on al-Sharaa, mirroring a United Nations Security Council move a day prior, ahead of his meeting with Trump. According to a notice on the U.S. Treasury Department’s website, the Specially Designated Global Terrorist designations were removed from both Sharaa and Syria’s interior minister, Anas Khattab.

The White House meeting also comes against the backdrop of a grinding government shutdown that has paralyzed federal agencies and left Washington mired in a political standoff over funding.

Senate Republicans and Democrats have reached a deal to end the impasse on Sunday evening, but the government won’t officially reopen until the House, which has been out of session for nearly six weeks, approves the agreement. The measure would then go to President Trump for his signature.

Speaking to reporters at the White House on Sunday evening, Trump said a deal to end the government shutdown was within reach.

‘It looks like we’re very close to the shutdown ending,’ he said.

The shutdown, which began on Oct. 1, has become the longest in U.S. history. It’s the 21st government shutdown since 1976 and the longest since a 34-day standoff over funding for Trump’s border wall halted operations from December 2018 to January 2019.
 

President Donald Trump has urged Senate Republicans to abolish Obamacare and reroute federal health care spending directly to individual Americans.

In a Truth Social post Saturday morning, Trump wrote: ‘I am recommending to Senate Republicans that the Hundreds of Billions of Dollars currently being sent to money sucking Insurance Companies in order to save the bad Healthcare provided by ObamaCare, BE SENT DIRECTLY TO THE PEOPLE SO THAT THEY CAN PURCHASE THEIR OWN, MUCH BETTER, HEALTHCARE, and have money left over.’

‘In other words, take from the BIG, BAD Insurance Companies, give it to the people, and terminate, per Dollar spent, the worst Healthcare anywhere in the World, ObamaCare.’

‘Unrelated, we must still terminate the Filibuster!’

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Rep. Thomas Massie — a Republican fiscal hawk facing a President Donald Trump-backed primary challenger in Kentucky — has previously described himself as ‘America First,’ but now he says he thinks that he’s ‘America only.’ 

‘I am tired of sending money overseas,’ he told Fox News Digital during an interview on Thursday. 

‘I am tired of favoring foreign beef over U.S.A.-grown beef,’ he continued. ‘I’m ready to be America only. And I think all congressmen should be that way.’

Massie gave Trump a mixed review, saying that the president is America First on ‘some’ fronts.

‘But when it comes to the beef, he is not America first. When it comes to sending money overseas to Ukraine and Israel,’ Massie said, ‘I think he needs to get back to his campaign promises and put America first. Because we’re not gonna make America great again by sending our money overseas.’

Massie noted that his ‘biggest disagreement’ with both the Trump administration and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is the increase in spending.

‘I mean, I thought we were conservatives. Why are we spending more this year than Joe Biden spent in his last year? Actually, we’re spending about $200 billion dollars more,’ he said, adding that the consequence ‘is inflation and higher interest rates.’

‘And people are feeling that. You can’t gaslight them,’ Massie added. ‘You can’t tell them that things are getting cheaper when they’re not getting cheaper.’

In a statement to Fox News Digital, White House spokesman Kush Desai accused Massie of ‘Fake Math.’ 

‘Here are the facts: President Trump’s Working Families Tax Cut Act cut mandatory spending by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years, and the budget deficit from April to September of this year is down a staggering 40% compared to last year, when Joe Biden was president,’ Desai declared in the statement.

‘Instead of Fake Math, Thomas Massie should reflect on how he betrayed his voters and hardworking Americans when he voted with every Democrat against the biggest tax cut for working families in American history, including no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security, no tax on overtime pay, increased child tax credits, and permanence for the 2017 Trump Tax Cuts,’ he added.

Massie said his other disagreements with what has been happening in D.C. are ‘secondary’ to the spending issue.

‘I would say, we need to follow through on some of our campaign promises. For instance, release the Epstein files,’ he said.

Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., have been spearheading a bid to force a House vote on a proposal that would compel the release of materials pertaining to Jeffrey Epstein. 

Their discharge petition has amassed 217 of the 218 signatures needed to force the vote, but Democratic Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva, who has said she will sign on, has still not yet been sworn in to office more than six weeks after winning a special election in Arizona.

Johnson ‘has tried every which way he can to avoid this vote,’ Massie claimed, asserting that the speaker has not sworn in the Democrat because she ‘represents the 218th signature I need to force a vote on releasing the Epstein files.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Johnson’s office for comment.

Massie, who owns cattle himself, said the president has ‘sort of gut punched the cattle ranchers and… livestock farmers’ in the U.S.

During remarks aboard Air Force One last month, Trump indicated the U.S. was considering buying beef from Argentina to drive down prices. 

Days later Reuters reported that a White House official indicated that the administration was quadrupling the nation’s low-tariff imports of beef from the South American nation. Increasing the tariff rate quota to 80,000 metric tons will allow Argentina to send greater quantities of the product to America at a lower rate of duty, according to the outlet.

The president has Massie in his political crosshairs — he has repeatedly reviled the congressman on Truth Social.

In a post on Monday, Trump referred to Massie as ‘a Weak and Pathetic RINO’ — a pejorative acronymn that stands for ‘Republican in name only.’ He also called the congressman ‘a totally ineffective LOSER,’ while expressing his support for primary challenger Ed Gallrein, who Trump is backing in the race.

Even as the president tries to convince voters in Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District to reject Massie, the lawmaker said that he does not regret endorsing Trump ahead of the 2024 election, noting that former Vice President Kamala Harris would have been a total ‘disaster.’

Massie initially backed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in the GOP presidential primary, but DeSantis dropped out and backed Trump, and Massie later endorsed the Republican juggernaut as well.

‘And I’m glad that President Trump won,’ he said. 

Trump has ‘done a lot of good things,’ he said, adding that many of them have been carried out via executive order, and he thinks Congress should vote on more of the issues so that the president’s moves are not simply ‘temporary actions.’

Asked whether he’d have any interest in potentially running for president himself, Massie said that he is not interested.

The Senate is in for a rare weekend session as the chamber remains in limbo while lawmakers try to find a way out of the government shutdown.

Behind the scenes, appropriators are cooking up a trio of spending bills to attach to the House-passed continuing resolution (CR), along with an extension to the bill that would, if passed, reopen government until December or January.

Whether a vote on the revamped CR and spending package happens Saturday is still up in the air. Senate Democrats, as they’ve done 14 times previously, are likely to block it. It all comes as the upper chamber is scheduled for a week-long recess to coincide with Veterans’ Day.

But Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., now wants to keep lawmakers in town until the shutdown ends.

When asked if there would be a vote on the plan, Thune said it would be ideal to have the package on the floor, but that ‘we’ve got to have votes to actually pass it.’ Republicans are reticent to putting the CR out again just to see it fail.

‘I’ve been talking all morning with some of the folks that are involved with the meeting, and I think we’re getting close to having it ready,’ Thune said. ‘We just need to get the text out there.’

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and his caucus, freshly emboldened by sweeping Election Day victories earlier in the week, are sticking by their newly released plan that would extend the expiring Obamacare subsidies by one year, and create a bipartisan working group to negotiate next steps after the government reopens.

But Senate Republicans immediately rejected the idea; Thune called it a ‘non-starter,’ while others in the GOP were angered by the proposal.

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., charged that he would appeal to President Donald Trump and his administration to slash funding from ‘pet projects’ in blue states and cities to pay federal workers as the shutdown drags on.

‘The idea that you’ve got a bunch of kamikaze pilots trying to burn this whole place down because they’re emboldened by an election where Democrats won in Democrat areas is totally insane,’ he said.

Senate Democrats were largely unsurprised that Republicans rejected the offer, however.

‘I know many Republicans stormed out of the gate to dismiss this offer, but that’s a terrible mistake,’ Schumer said.

Thune and his conference have, throughout the course of the 39-day shutdown, said that they would only deal with the subsidies after the government reopened, and have offered Schumer and Senate Democrats a vote on a bill addressing the healthcare issue once the closure ends.

‘I’m not surprised,’ Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., said. ‘They don’t want to help people with their health care.’

But Republicans countered that a simple extension of the enhanced subsidies, which were modified under former President Joe Biden during the COVID-19 pandemic, would funnel money straight to insurers.

Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., has been in talks with Senate Democrats on a path forward, particularly through jump-starting government funding with the impending trio of spending bills.

After Schumer unveiled Democrats’ plan, she charged that ‘since Obamacare came into effect, look, who’s gotten rich? It’s not the people.’

‘They’re talking about the people’s premiums and have … they taken it to the companies that are actually making the money off of it? They’re not,’ Britt said. ‘So I look forward to hearing why in the world they want to continue these profits and not actually help the people they serve.’

Senate Democrats, however, contend that their offer was fair.

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., argued that there were some in the caucus that wanted to do a multi-year extension, while others wanted to go beyond just the enhanced subsidies. He reiterated his frustration that the core of the issue, from his perspective, was that neither Schumer nor Thune would sit down and negotiate.

‘We made a really simple, really scaled-down offer that could get the government up and operating and [is] really good for them politically,’ he said. ‘I just still don’t understand why they won’t accept the offer.’

The Senate is in for a rare weekend session as the chamber remains in limbo while lawmakers try to find a way out of the government shutdown.

Behind the scenes, appropriators are cooking up a trio of spending bills to attach to the House-passed continuing resolution (CR), along with an extension to the bill that would, if passed, reopen government until December or January.

But the package was not ready for primetime Saturday, and no votes were held. Instead, Senate Republicans spent hours railing against Obamacare and Senate Democrats’ desire to extend the expiring premium subsidies on the floor. 

When the package does hit the floor, Senate Democrats, as they’ve done 14 times previously, are likely to block it. It all comes as the upper chamber is scheduled for a week-long recess to coincide with Veterans Day.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., now wants to keep lawmakers in town until the shutdown ends.

When asked if there would be a vote on the plan, Thune said it would be ideal to have the package on the floor, but ‘we’ve got to have votes to actually pass it.’ Republicans are reticent to put the CR out again just to see it fail.

‘I’ve been talking all morning with some of the folks that are involved with the meeting, and I think we’re getting close to having it ready,’ Thune said. ‘We just need to get the text out there.’

The spending package, however, is just one piece of the puzzle to reopening the government. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and his caucus, freshly emboldened by sweeping Election Day victories earlier in the week, are sticking by their newly released plan that would extend the expiring Obamacare subsidies by one year and create a bipartisan working group to negotiate next steps after the government reopens.

But Senate Republicans immediately rejected the idea; Thune called it a ‘non-starter,’ while others in the GOP were angered by the proposal.

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., said he would appeal to President Donald Trump and his administration to slash funding from ‘pet projects’ in blue states and cities to pay federal workers as the shutdown drags on.

‘The idea that you’ve got a bunch of kamikaze pilots trying to burn this whole place down because they’re emboldened by an election where Democrats won in Democrat areas is totally insane,’ he said.

Senate Democrats were largely unsurprised that Republicans rejected the offer, however.

‘I know many Republicans stormed out of the gate to dismiss this offer, but that’s a terrible mistake,’ Schumer said.

Thune and his conference have, throughout the course of the 39-day shutdown, said they would only deal with the subsidies after the government reopened and have offered Schumer and Senate Democrats a vote on a bill addressing the healthcare issue once the closure ends.

‘I’m not surprised,’ Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., said. ‘They don’t want to help people with their healthcare.’

But Republicans countered that a simple extension of the enhanced subsidies, which were modified under former President Joe Biden during the COVID-19 pandemic, would funnel money straight to insurers.

Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., has been in talks with Senate Democrats on a path forward, particularly through jump-starting government funding with the impending trio of spending bills.

After Schumer unveiled Democrats’ plan, she charged that ‘since Obamacare came into effect, look who’s gotten rich? It’s not the people.’

‘They’re talking about the people’s premiums and have … they have taken it to the companies that are actually making the money off of it? They’re not,’ Britt said. ‘So, I look forward to hearing why in the world they want to continue these profits and not actually help the people they serve.’

Senate Democrats, however, contend that their offer was fair.

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., argued that there were some in the caucus that wanted to do a multi-year extension, while others wanted to go beyond just the enhanced subsidies. He reiterated his frustration that the core of the issue, from his perspective, was that neither Schumer nor Thune would sit down and negotiate.

‘We made a really simple, really scaled-down offer that could get the government up and operating and [is] really good for them politically,’ he said. ‘I just still don’t understand why they won’t accept the offer.’

The Senate could take a test vote as early as tomorrow afternoon on a revamped Republican bill to end the government shutdown and fund parts of the government for the rest of the fiscal year. 

We are still waiting on bill text on a measure which would fund the government through late January and provide money for the Agriculture Department (which funds SNAP), the Veterans Affairs Department and military construction projects and Congress through Sept. 30, 2026. 

But things will begin moving once text is posted tonight or tomorrow morning. 

This appears to be a pure spending bill with nothing separate for renewing Obamacare subsidies. 

The test vote needs 60 yeas. That entails Democratic buy-in. Fox is told to watch the following Democratic senators to see if they will vote to break a filibuster — although they might not be needed to vote for the final bill. Only a simple majority is needed there. 

Fox is told here is the universe of potential senators who caucus with the Democrats to watch as possible yeas to break a filibuster:

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Sens. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., Jack Reed, D-R.I., Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., John Fetterman, D-Pa., Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., Gary Peters, D-Mo., Angus King, I-Maine, and Patty Murray, D-Wash. Murray is the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee. Fox is told that Murray scored some significant language in the tenuous spending pact. 

This is a fragile coalition and could fall apart. 

But if the Senate breaks the filibuster, it is just a matter of time before the senators vote to re-open the government. In fact, it’s possible that the Senate could vote Sunday night if senators can forge a time agreement. 

By the book, the Senate is afforded significant debate time once it breaks a filibuster. Fox is told that progressives, steamed that they scored nothing on health care — and were burned by their own party — could try to stretch things out as much as possible. That could mean the Senate doesn’t vote until Tuesday or beyond on final passage. 

But by the same token, Democrats are only preventing SNAP benefits from going out. So they could agree to an expedited process. 

The House is on 48 hours notice to come back. So the House may not return until midweek to align with the Senate and re-open the government. But it’s likely the House could be recalled as soon as possible. 

The House’s disposition is unclear on this legislation. However, it’s hard to believe that most Republicans wouldn’t take this deal. In additon, Reps. Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y., Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., and Jared Golden, D-Maine, are among moderate Democrats who may be in play to vote yes if the GOP loses a few votes. Golden was the lone House Democrat who voted for the old interim spending bill on Sept. 19. Golden has since announced his retirement.

Here’s another question:

Would the House swear-in Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz., before or after the vote? Democrats will bray if Johnson fails to swear-in Grijalva before a possible House vote.

And, as we say, it’s always about the math. 

Swearing-in Grijalva puts the House at 433 members with two vacancies. The breakdown is 219 Republicans to 214 Democrats. That means the GOP can only lose two votes before needing help from the Democrats.
 

In addition, brace for the internecine Democratic warfare which will start once Democrats break with their party. Big divisions will emerge between those Democrats who vote to break the filibuster and those holding out for Obamacare subsidies. 

Moreover, consider the emerging chasm between House and Senate Democrats once this is over. 

And, here’s the kicker: It’s entirely possible that a group of Senate Democrats threw their colleagues under the bus to end the shutdown — and the party scored no guarantees on health care money despite their risky political shutdown gambit. 

A reckoning is coming.

Or shall we say, ‘reckonings.’

And they’re coming, whether the government re-opens soon or remains shuttered.

If the government stays closed, voters will likely torch both parties for not hammering out a deal. Air traffic delays are stacking up. Those problems only intensify as we near Thanksgiving and Christmas. That’s to say nothing of multiple missed paychecks for federal employees, stress, economic consequences and no SNAP benefits for the needy.

Some of those concerns will dissipate if lawmakers address the shutdown quickly. But there will be a reckoning if the shutdown drags deeper into November.

There are likely specific reckonings for both political parties.

For Republicans, it’s a resistance by GOP leaders to address spiking health care subsidies. Yes. The GOP is making a compelling argument that health care subsidies are only necessary because Obamacare is a problem and health care prices skyrocketed. So Republicans are back fighting against Obamacare.

In fact, the entire government shutdown is not about spending levels and appropriations. It’s a re-litigation of the touchstone law passed under President Obama in 2010. And Republicans — despite multiple campaign promises and dozens of efforts to kill the law over a six-year period, failed at nearly every turn.

Despite issues with Obamacare, Democrats annexed the public’s concern about health care costs and linked that to government funding. Democrats appear like the party trying to address the issue as premiums spike. And Republicans, despite promises that they’ll get to it, are inert on the subject. They’re even championing efforts to lambaste Obamacare — much the same as they did in 2010 when Congress passed the law.

Republicans are latched on to the concept that the subsidies are ‘pumping money to insurance companies,’ as Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., put it on Fox. Lankford also characterized those who benefitted from Obamacare as a ‘select group.’ It works out to about 24 million people. That’s seven percent of the U.S. population. So maybe that burns the GOP politically. Maybe it doesn’t.

A major reckoning looms for the Democrats, too.

It’s possible that a coalition of Democratic senators may break with the Democratic Party and support a new GOP plan to re-open the government on a temporary basis. Nowhere is it written that Democrats — who made the shutdown about health care — are guaranteed an outcome on Obamacare subsidies. Yes, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., have said they’ll address the health care issue after the government is open. But that’s not necessarily a fix.

So Democrats are fuming.

Therefore, it’s a distinct possibility that Democrats will refuse to fund the government in an effort to extract a concession on Obamacare subsidies — and walk away empty-handed.

Such an outcome will spark an internecine firestorm inside the Democratic Party. Progressives felt that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., rolled them back in March when he and a squadron of other Democrats helped the GOP crack a filibuster to avoid a shutdown.

It’s doubtful that Schumer will help this time. But Senate Republicans hope to coax just enough Democrats to overcome the filibuster on a pending test vote and then fund the government through late January.

That’s the reckoning for the Democrats. 

No outcome on health care. And getting the screws put to them by members of their own party.

Again.

Progressives will be apoplectic. And House Democrats will seethe — not so privately — at Senate Democrats.

The Senate’s test vote on the new GOP proposal could come as early as Sunday evening. The revised package would also fund the Department of Agriculture and Department of Veterans Affairs, plus, Congress until Sept. 30, 2026.

Fox is told Republicans believe they are in range of persuading Democrats who are sweating the shutdown to join them.

Fox is told that air traffic control and flight delays are contributing to the Democrats’ consternation.

That said, it is believed that the Senate GOP leadership is reluctant to force a vote related to the retooled, spending bill without a guarantee it could break a filibuster. The last thing the Senate needs is another failed procedural vote – after repeated failed test votes over the past six weeks.

Let’s game out the timing for a moment:

By the book, if the Senate breaks the filibuster late Sunday, it’s doubtful the chamber can take a final vote on the package until Monday or Tuesday.  But Fox is told there is a distinct possibility that Democrats could yield back time to expedite the process in the interest of quickly re-opening the government. By the same token, angry liberal senators could bleed out the parliamentary clocks and attempt to amend the bill to their liking — presumably with Obamacare provisions.

The Senate must break yet another filibuster to finish the bill. Then it’s on to final passage. That only needs a simple majority. And even if some Democrats voted to hurdle the filibuster, they might not support the underlying plan at the end. However, that’s not a problem if GOP senators provide the necessary votes.

Then it’s on to the House. The House’s disposition is unclear on this legislation. However, it’s hard to believe that most Republicans wouldn’t take this deal. Reps. Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y., Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash. and Jared Golden, D-Maine, are among moderate Democrats who may be in play to vote yes if the GOP loses a few votes. Golden was the lone House Democrat who voted for the old interim spending bill on Friday, September 19. Golden has since announced his retirement.

Another big question: 

Would the House swear-in Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz., before or after the vote? Democrats will bray if Johnson fails to swear-in Grijalva before a possible House vote

And, as we say, it’s always about the math.

Swearing-in Grijalva puts the House at 433 members with two vacancies. The breakdown is 219 Republicans to 214 Democrats. That means the GOP can only lose two votes before needing help from the Democrats.

Regardless, the House would not come back until at least the middle of next week if not later. It hinges on how fast the Senate can move, if it has the votes to break a filibuster and what happens to the Obamacare question.

All of this is uncertain after 39 days of the government shutdown.

And the only thing which is certain is the political reckoning for both parties.