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 senators switched their vote compared to previous continuing resolutions in 2025?
Executive Summary
Two Democrats—Senators John Fetterman (Pa.) and Catherine Cortez Masto (Nev.)—and one independent who caucuses with Democrats, Angus King (Maine), crossed party lines to vote for a Republican-led “clean” continuing resolution in late September 2025, marking a clear change from earlier 2025 roll-call patterns where more Democrats had supported stopgap funding [1] [2] [3]. Senate roll-call tallies through November show a shrinking number of Democratic defectors compared with a March or earlier CR vote, and at least one Republican, Sen. Rand Paul, opposed the GOP package — illustrating cross-party divergences that shifted between votes [4] [5].
1. Who actually switched their votes and why the move mattered
Senators John Fetterman, Catherine Cortez Masto and Angus King voted with Republicans for a short-term funding measure to avert a shutdown on the September 30 vote, a break from the broader Democratic caucus that generally opposed the GOP approach that month [1] [2] [3]. The three senators justified their votes as pragmatic steps to keep the government open and protect constituents from immediate harm, with Fetterman explicitly framing his decision as “for the country over party,” and King describing his choice as a difficult, torn call given competing pressures [2]. The defections were consequential because they showed that a small group of senators prioritized avoiding a shutdown, even when it meant bucking party strategy, and they highlighted how narrow majority dynamics can magnify each senator’s leverage in continuing-resolution fights [1] [3].
2. How this vote compares to earlier continuing resolution roll calls in 2025
Comparative roll-call data show a notable shift: in March and earlier 2025 CR votes, a larger cohort of Democrats (reported as about 10 in one earlier vote) had crossed over to back GOP measures to avert a shutdown, whereas by the late-September vote only three Democrats/independents did so, and at least one Republican, Sen. Rand Paul, voted against the GOP package — the pattern signals a tightening of party-line discipline among Democrats and emerging intra-GOP dissent [4] [5]. Senate roll-call compilations for the 119th Congress confirm the specific tallies (e.g., 55-45 or 54-44 outcomes on various procedural and substantive CR votes), but the essential fact is a movement from more bipartisan elasticity earlier in 2025 to fewer crossovers later in the year [6] [5].
3. Conflicting accounts and what they reveal about political messaging
News summaries and party statements frame defections differently: local and individual statements emphasize constituent protection and pragmatic governance, while party leaders highlight discipline and bargaining leverage. Republican leaders framed the September crossovers as evidence that their “clean” CR approach could attract Democratic support, while Democratic leaders signaled concern that defectors undercut negotiation leverage on issues like healthcare subsidies [1] [2]. The divergence in messaging reveals an ongoing political tug-of-war: defecting senators portray votes as constituency-driven and non-ideological, whereas party leaders treat the same votes as strategic wins or breaches that affect broader bargaining positions [1] [3].
4. The procedural and arithmetic dynamics that made each senator pivotal
Senate rules mean most CRs require 60 votes to advance, so even a few defections alter outcomes decisively. The late-September vote failed despite the three Democratic/independent crossovers because it still fell short of 60; earlier in 2025 a larger set of crossovers had been sufficient to pass short-term funding or to blunt shutdown threats [1] [4]. Republican opposition from within the caucus, exemplified by votes like Rand Paul’s against the GOP proposal, shows that intra-party fractures can be as determinative as inter-party defections, and that arithmetic in the 119th Senate made each senator’s choice disproportionately consequential for government funding outcomes [4] [5].
5. Bottom line: what the switching pattern means moving forward
The factual pattern across 2025 CR votes shows episodic Democratic defections concentrated in a small number of senators rather than a broad, sustained trend; defections peaked earlier in the year and narrowed by late September, with three high-profile crossovers reported then [1] [2] [3]. The practical implication is that future continuing resolutions will hinge on individual calculations about constituent impact, pressure from party leaders, and intra-GOP cohesion, making single-senator decisions pivotal in an evenly divided Senate; the roll-call records compiled in November 2025 confirm the shifting arithmetic and the presence of both Democratic and Republican departures from strict party-line voting [6] [5].