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.
Does a CR need approval from both chambers of Congress to fund federal departments?
Executive Summary
A Continuing Resolution (CR) used to keep federal departments funded when Congress has not enacted regular appropriations must be approved by both the House and the Senate; it functions as appropriations legislation and moves through the same bicameral process that regular funding bills follow. Past and recent examples show the House can pass a CR, but without Senate approval — and often without clearing Senate procedural hurdles — the CR does not become effective and a shutdown risk remains [1] [2] [3]. The distinction between a CR and other “concurrent resolutions” explains some confusion: a concurrent resolution does not carry the force of law, while a CR does because it is enacted through the appropriations/joint resolution process that requires congressional passage in identical form [4] [5].
1. Why this matters now: Government funding hangs on bicameral approval
A number of recent legislative skirmishes demonstrate the central fact that a CR must clear both chambers of Congress to fund agencies. The House passed a Republican-backed CR and the Senate later rejected that same measure, illustrating that House passage alone is insufficient to avert a shutdown [2] [1]. The Library of Congress record and appropriations status tables show CRs appear in the same legislative sequence as appropriations bills, which require passage in both the House and Senate and typically the president’s signature to take effect as law [1] [6]. Political dynamics in each chamber — including party control, voting thresholds, and use of amendments — determine whether a CR that passes one chamber will succeed in the other [7] [2].
2. Legal mechanics: A CR is appropriations legislation, not a mere resolution
Legal and procedural summaries distinguish a Continuing Resolution from other nonbinding measures. A CR is a temporary spending bill that continues funding for federal departments and agencies when regular appropriations are not enacted; it operates within the appropriations framework and therefore must be passed by both chambers as legislation [3] [5]. By contrast, a “concurrent resolution” does not have the force of law and does not fund government operations; this contrast explains some public confusion when terms like “CR” or “concurrent resolution” are used imprecisely in political messaging [4]. The Government Accountability Office and congressional guides summarize that funding measures—whether full appropriations acts or short-term CRs—follow the bicameral process and are subject to the same passage requirements [5] [6].
3. Politics and procedure: Why Senate approval can be the decisive hurdle
The Senate’s procedural rules and political arithmetic often make its approval the decisive step for any CR. Reporting on recent votes shows the Senate rejected a House-passed CR even though the House had approved it, underscoring the Senate’s gatekeeping role [2] [7]. Senate consideration can involve cloture and a 60-vote threshold for overcoming filibusters on many measures, making bipartisan support practically necessary for controversial CRs [2]. Stakeholder campaigns and committee messaging urging a “clean CR” or alternate versions highlight the strategic uses of CRs as leverage; groups pushing for specific outcomes reveal partisan agendas behind seemingly technical funding maneuvers [7].
4. Examples and records: How recent bills illustrate the rule
Concrete examples reinforce the rule that CRs require bicameral passage. H.R.5371, a Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act cited in congressional records, was introduced in the House and required passage in both chambers to fund agencies for FY2026; its failure in the Senate demonstrates that introduction and passage in one chamber do not suffice [1]. Appropriations status tables for FY2026 list multiple bills and show the stepwise approval process through both House and Senate stages, providing a transparent legislative record of where CRs and appropriations measures stand [6]. Coverage of failed negotiations and blocked measures repeatedly notes that the absence of Senate agreement — not merely House votes — is what precipitates shutdown risks [7] [8].
5. Bottom line and what to watch next: Process, votes, and framing
The practical bottom line is clear: a Continuing Resolution designed to fund federal departments must secure identical approval from both the House and the Senate to take effect; the president’s role varies depending on whether the CR is enacted as a joint resolution or appropriations bill and whether any veto is threatened [3] [4]. Watch three signals in any funding fight: which chamber first passes a CR, whether the other chamber takes it up or amends it, and whether Senate procedural thresholds (e.g., cloture) are met — these determine whether a CR will prevent a shutdown. Political messaging around “clean” versus “conditioned” CRs also signals whether stakeholders are pursuing governance continuity or using funding deadlines for leverage [7] [9].