Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which continuing resolutions in 2021 required bipartisan support and how did Senators vote?
Executive Summary
The central verifiable claim is that a December 2021 continuing resolution (CR) to fund the government through February 18, 2022 passed with bipartisan support in the Senate, recorded as a 69–28 vote, and passed the House 221–212 with Representative Adam Kinzinger as the lone Republican voting with Democrats [1]. Broader contextual claims that CRs routinely require cross-party support because of Senate procedures and chronic appropriations shortfalls are supported by later analyses describing the Senate’s 60‑vote threshold dynamics and the recurring reliance on stopgap measures [2] [3]. This review extracts those key claims, tests them against the supplied sources, and compares how the narrow December 2021 episode fits the longer-term pattern of bipartisan stopgap lawmaking.
1. Which 2021 stopgap actually needed cross‑aisle votes and why the December package mattered
The most concrete instance cited in the material is the December 2021 continuing resolution that averted a shutdown by extending funding to February 18, 2022, and that measure explicitly required and received bipartisan support in the Senate, clearing on a 69–28 vote [1]. The House vote tally of 221–212 confirms a narrower, more partisan posture in that chamber but still shows at least one GOP defection—Rep. Adam Kinzinger—joining Democrats to secure passage. This episode demonstrates that on key funding deadlines, the Senate’s need for broad coalitions translated into a bipartisan outcome in December 2021, even as the House margin illustrated partisan strain and the influence of a few swing votes [1].
2. What senators’ voting behavior reveals about floor math and leverage
The December 2021 Senate tally of 69 votes in favor indicates that a substantial slice of Republicans broke with leadership or at least did not oppose the stopgap, reflecting pragmatic calculations about avoiding a shutdown and the Senate’s cloture-driven rules. Threats from conservative senators to delay consideration over policy disputes—specifically vaccine mandate rules—surfaced in reporting, and some Republicans pressed for votes on amendments to restrict federal funding for mandates; that amendment failed 48–50 [1]. The voting pattern shows that, even amid intra-party pressure, a coalition of Republicans and Democrats can coalesce to pass temporary funding, while substantive policy amendments remain battlegrounds [1].
3. How the December 2021 CR fits the longer trend of stopgap dependence
Analysts emphasize that Congress commonly resorts to continuing resolutions because appropriations rarely finish on schedule, and 2021 was no exception [3]. The December action fits a persistent pattern: short-term CRs are often used to buy time and sidestep protracted negotiations, which in turn forces cross‑party compromises in the Senate where supermajority practice and filibuster norms elevate the value of bipartisan votes. This structural reality explains why stopgaps frequently attract votes from both parties even when substantive disagreements remain unresolved [3].
4. Later reporting shows the same structural constraint but different dynamics in 2025 debates
Subsequent coverage in 2025 underscores that Senate dynamics continue to make bipartisan support practically necessary for many CR outcomes, noting failed procedural attempts to advance House‑passed funding measures and close procedural margins where 60‑vote cloture is pivotal [2]. The 2025 reports confirm the institutional pressure that produced the December 2021 bipartisan CR: Senate procedural thresholds and fractious negotiations often force cross-party compromise to avert shutdowns, even as the specific partisan alignments and amendment fights shift with each deadline [2].
5. What the sources leave out and where agendas might color narratives
The supplied pieces document the December 2021 roll calls and broader institutional trends, but they omit a complete roll call list of every senator’s vote on that CR within the cited excerpts; the summary figures are presented without a full senator-by-senator breakdown in these passages [1]. Reporting also highlights political disputes—vaccine mandate fights and amendment showdowns—which can frame Republican dissent as obstruction or as principled opposition depending on outlet emphasis. Readers should note that while vote totals are factual, narratives about motives and the weight of individual senators’ actions may reflect editorial framing rather than exhaustive roll‑call analysis [1] [2] [3].