Fact check: What are the potential consequences of a clean CR on the 2025 federal budget?

Executive Summary: A clean continuing resolution (CR) for the 2025 federal budget would temporarily avert an immediate lapse in government funding but risks significant programmatic gaps because it does not resolve underlying FY26 appropriations shortfalls. Analysts warn a clean CR could leave housing vouchers, health insurance subsidies, and nutrition programs underfunded, while the ongoing shutdown has already produced widespread furloughs, delayed federal data and permitting, and strained federal service delivery ^{[1] [2] [3]}. The magnitude of effects depends on how long a clean CR spans and which programs appropriators prioritize later.

1. How a clean CR can quietly strip vital housing supports

Multiple analyses identify loss or nonrenewal of Housing Choice and Emergency Housing Vouchers as among the clearest risks from a clean CR because FY26 bills as drafted lack sufficient funding to renew all existing vouchers. The potential impact is sizable: reports estimate more than 2.4 million households rely on rental assistance that could face cutoffs if Congress rolls funding forward at current levels without targeted supplemental funding ^{[1] [4]}. The effect would be immediate for households whose vouchers expire in the fiscal year covered by a CR and could heighten housing instability and homelessness absent discrete appropriations fixes.

2. Health coverage and marketplace implications—why Democrats resisted a pure CR

Analysts note a clean CR would not extend Affordable Care Act tax credits, risking premium spikes and coverage losses for millions if credits expire at the fiscal-year transition. Democrats in the Senate withheld support for a CR lacking an extension, framing health subsidies as a non-deferable item ^[1]. Because a CR preserves baseline funding levels rather than enacting policy-specific extensions, a clean CR without separate legislative action would leave the ACA subsidies unresolved, with downstream impacts on insurers, premiums, and enrollment behavior during the next plan year.

3. Nutrition and social safety net programs could see operational shortfalls

Observers point to programs like WIC and SNAP as vulnerable to funding shortfalls or administrative delays under a clean CR, particularly if the CR maintains current levels while caseloads grow or specific program authorities lapse. The shutdown already disrupted program operations broadly, creating backlogs in benefits administration and service delivery ^[5]. A multi-month clean CR that fails to address programmatic demand or authorization expirations could force midyear cuts, interruptions to benefit issuance, or rushed corrective appropriations later in the fiscal year.

4. The workforce and federal operations picture—furloughs and data blackouts

Current reporting shows the shutdown produced large-scale personnel impacts—estimates vary, with roughly 750,000 to 900,000 workers furloughed and another 2 million working without pay—and suspended economic data collection and regulatory reviews ^{[2] [3] [5]}. A clean CR would not retroactively compensate workers or rapidly resolve backlogs; moreover, without targeted pay legislation or retroactive relief, political battles over compensation and backpay obligations would persist. The combination of workforce strain and paused federal activities can impair enforcement, permitting, and grant workflows beyond the CR’s immediate term.

5. Regulatory review, permitting, and grant delays that rippled from the shutdown

Analyses document delays to regulatory reviews, permitting processes, and federal communications stemming from the ongoing lapse in appropriations, a situation a clean CR would not automatically fix if agencies lack contingency funds or authorizations for specific programs ^[5]. For infrastructure, land management, and environmental reviews, pauses translate into project slowdowns and private-sector uncertainty. A clean CR may restore baseline funding but cannot retroactively compress regulatory timelines or compensate for lost review windows, potentially delaying approvals and contracts for months.

6. Counting the numbers—why different reports give different magnitudes

Source estimates vary: one set cites furloughs of over 750,000 and $400 million in compensation costs, while another frames the workforce impact as roughly 900,000 furloughed and 2 million working unpaid ^{[2] [3]}. These divergences reflect differences in timing, agency reporting cutoffs, and which categories of workers were counted. A clean CR’s consequences similarly vary by what it preserves; if appropriations in committee bills already fall short of current obligations (notably for housing and health subsidies), program cuts occur regardless of the temporary funding patch ^{[1] [4]}.

7. The political calculus—why a clean CR is a stopgap, not a solution

A clean CR offers a short-term procedural fix that keeps government operating at current funding levels but leaves high-stakes policy choices—housing voucher renewals, ACA subsidy extensions, and targeted program increases—unresolved. The shutdown’s real-world disruptions intensified leverage around those choices, prompting partisan standoffs over pay and targeted extensions ^{[1] [2]}. Unless lawmakers pair a CR with discrete legislative actions to shore up vulnerable programs, the practical consequences will include service interruptions, benefit erosions, and continued uncertainty for millions of beneficiaries and federal workers ^{[1] [5]}.