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.
Fact check: Which members of Congress voted for the spending bills that led to the 2025 shutdown?
Executive Summary
Congressional votes that precipitated the 2025 government shutdown split sharply along party lines in both chambers, with a handful of Democrats breaking with their party in the Senate to advance funding measures while most House Republicans backed a partisan budget leading into the impasse. Roll-call tallies show specific defections — Senators John Fetterman, Catherine Cortez Masto and Angus King voted to advance a funding bill — and wider majorities and margins that framed the shutdown fight [1] [2] [3].
1. Who actually voted to advance the funding measures and where the defections mattered
The Senate votes that framed the shutdown were closely contested, and three Democratic senators — John Fetterman, Catherine Cortez Masto and Angus King — voted to advance the funding bill in a key procedural 54-45 vote mentioned in contemporary reporting [1]. Other outlets show Senate tallies indicating 52 Senate Republicans supported a resolution to fund government operations while a coalition of 43 Democrats and one Republican opposed that same measure, illustrating a sharp partisan line with small, consequential deviations [2]. Roll-call compilations and Senate summaries circulated during October and late October 2025 corroborate these counts and list individual yea/nay records, demonstrating that the procedural advances required bipartisan or near-unanimous Republican support plus those few Democratic crossovers to move measures forward [4] [5].
2. How House-level votes set the stage and who carried the majority
The House’s earlier budget and appropriations pathway shaped the shutdown by passing a GOP-aligned budget resolution narrowly; the February 25, 2025 House budget passed 217-215 with almost all Republicans in favor and only Representative Thomas Massie voting against among GOP ranks, signaling near-unity among House Republicans for the fiscal plan that later collided with Senate Democrats’ objections [3]. That House majority, combined with subsequent appropriations or continuing resolution proposals, contributed to a situation where the Senate faced funding packages reflecting House priorities; the partisan cohesion in the House made Senate defections and filibuster dynamics decisive in whether bills could clear the upper chamber [3] [5].
3. The pivotal roll-call defeats and precise vote counts that triggered the shutdown
Senate procedural and passage votes in late September and October 2025 recorded narrow margins that mattered: a continuing appropriations measure labeled H.R. 5371 was registered in the Senate with a recorded vote showing 55 yeas and 45 nays on a September 30 procedural action, reflecting the divided posture of the chamber on FY26 funding [4]. Other contemporaneous reports noted multiple failed attempts to advance funding — with Democrats blocking bills repeatedly and leadership scheduling successive test votes — and roll-call summaries captured the repetitive nature of these defeats, which cumulatively produced a lapse in appropriations and the resulting shutdown [2] [6]. These formal tallies are the definitive record for who voted for or against the measures ultimately tied to the funding lapse [4].
4. Competing narratives: blame, strategy, and calls to change Senate rules
Public explanations for the shutdown diverged sharply. Senate Republican leadership argued for passing the House’s measures or using procedural changes to force outcomes, while Democrats framed opposition as resistance to bills that would raise costs for consumers or cut programs; President Trump publicly urged Senate Republicans to pursue the "nuclear option" to bypass the filibuster, a proposal rejected by Senate Majority Leader John Thune, underscoring institutional limits on using simple majorities to end the stalemate [7] [6]. Media accounts highlight that these strategic choices — whether to preserve the filibuster or alter it for funding votes — shaped which individual senators risked breaking from their party and which caucus bore political responsibility in public perception [7] [6].
5. What the roll calls leave out and why names matter for accountability
Roll-call numbers and lists provide the concrete answer to “who voted,” but they do not capture behind-the-scenes negotiations, withheld amendments, or political bargaining that led to votes being cast as they were; investigative timelines and legislative tracking note repeated procedural votes and amendments tied to SNAP and other programs that informed opposing positions yet are not obvious in a single yea/nay line [5] [7]. For accountability, the roll-call records and published vote lists are the primary source to name legislators who supported specific spending bills connected to the shutdown, while contemporaneous reportage provides context on motivations and consequences. Readers seeking the exact, verified roll-call names should consult official Senate and House vote records and the compiled summaries reflected in the cited reporting [4].