Schumer says he will not support 7- or 10-day stopgap to avoid shutdown

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: The Hill

09/29/25 6:24 PM ET


Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) said he would not support a weeklong or 10-day government funding measure to avoid a government shutdown on Wednesday and buy more time to negotiate with President Trump and GOP leaders.

Schumer said he felt that Monday’s meeting with Trump at the White House made some progress because it gave him and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) a chance to warn Trump directly about the possibility that thousands of Americans will see their health insurance premiums soar next year.

Schumer urged Trump to press GOP leaders to add language to a seven-week continuing resolution to address the expiration of Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies, but he ruled out supporting a weeklong or 10-day stopgap funding measure to buy some more time. “No, we have to do it now. The time is a wasting. We have to do it now. We’ve delayed and delayed and delayed,” he said, arguing that the extension of the Affordable Care Act subsidies can’t wait.

“As Martin Luther King once said, later means never,” he said. “They don’t want to do this, the Republican leaders, because their right wing — it will divide their party — their right wing hates ACA altogether.” “But we have to get it done,” he added. “The way to do this, is the president, who was really listening to us, tells the Republicans to do it.”

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5527884-schumer-stopgap-shutdown/

[turbinetree]

1. He already knew that he was going to harm over 17 million people with health care he doesn't give a shit............

and every maga senior on Medicare...........that voted for this shit show............wait and see what happens Medicare on January 1, 2026...........lets get back to the 6 states that are going to be the guinea pigs for that shit show to begin the process of privatizing Medicare for wall street and the health care companies backed by wall street greed.............JFC

[lostincalifornia]

4. I believe the funding cuts had to do with Medicaid, not Medicare, and not renewing the subsidies

applied to the ACA, which would mean millions would lose their coverage on the ACA because people could not afford the premiums without the subsidies.

[ImNotGod]

12. Starting Jan 1st subsidies will go up around 50 to 100 percent, this will be the death of ACA which the fascists want.nt

[lostincalifornia]

14. absolutely. It is the most mean, immoral, attack against the most vulnerable people in our country.

[Skittles]

32. correct, and that will eventually increase healthcare costs for EVERYONE

yup

[Irish_Dem]

21. Medicare is going to a new managed care model in 6 states in 2026.

They will start requiring prior authorizations for some services.

This is MEDICARE.

[flamingdem]

23. Aarp should be screaming about this

Don't think they are though. Haven't read about it yet.

[Irish_Dem]

25. Yes, no one seems to care.

It could be a very big change.

[flamingdem]

39. The seniors have been out there protesting

Maybe this is the next thing to rile up the troops!

[Irish_Dem]

42. I hope people complain.

I fear Trump may start out slow and then put the whammy on Medicare.

[pat_k]

30. How the hell are they doing that?

If I have Part A and Part B and a Supplement to cover "out of pocket" A and B costs, how could my state force me into managed care?

The only thing "managed" about my coverage is Part D, prescriptions, with formularies and pre-authorization required for some drugs.

[Irish_Dem]

31. If you are living in one of the six states, they are going to do it.

That is what the press releases are saying.

New Jersey
Ohio
Oklahoma
Texas
Arizona
Washington

[pat_k]

37. I poked around. It is a CMS "experiment" to root out nonexistent "waste/fraud/abuse"

It's not the states that are implementing this. It is the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. They are adding some pre-authorization requirements for certain services/procedures provided under Part A and Part B (currently covered without pre-authorization).

It is not Managed Care in the same sense that Medicare Advantage is Managed Care.

So, it sounds like it will actually only affect people like me who keep their original Medicare and add a supplement because they refuse to be shoved into the rapidly deteriorating Medicare Advantage Plans.

Not surprising because Republicans hate people like me. They've fucked around with Medicare Advantage to weaken that coverage, but have been unable to touch Original Medicare. I am actually wondering if people in those six states can sue. I would like to know what authority CMS has to run this "experiment." Did the Republican Congress grant it? Or is it another case of an agency doing shit it is not allowed to do? I have more research to do.

AI Summary

CMS picked six states—Arizona, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, and Washington—for the Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction (WISeR) model based on a combination of evaluability and operational criteria, including selecting within the same Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC) jurisdictions to allow for direct comparison between test and comparison states, choosing states with sufficient claims volume for reliable impact estimates, and prioritizing states with existing administrative contractors that already had coverage policies for the targeted services.

Here's a breakdown of the selection criteria and process:

MAC Jurisdictions: The model was assigned to four MAC jurisdictions: JH, JL, JF, and J15.

Within-MAC Comparisons: CMS selected states within the same MAC jurisdictions so they could compare the test states to other states within that same MAC.

Adequate Claims Volume: States were chosen for their sufficient volume of claims, which allows for precise estimates of the model's impact.

Existing Coverage Policies: CMS prioritized states where the administrative contractors already had coverage policies for the services targeted by the model.

Geographic Diversity: The selected states represent diverse geographic areas.

Highest Historical Claim Paid Amounts: States meeting the evaluation criteria were also selected based on the highest historical claim paid amounts.

[pat_k]

38. Found more:

The authority under which this program is being implemented is Section 1115A of the Social Security Act.

Another AI summary:

CMS is implementing its Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction (WISeR) Model under the authority of Section 1115A of the Social Security Act. This act created the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation (CMMI), which is authorized to test innovative payment and service delivery models in Medicare and Medicaid to reduce costs while preserving or improving quality of care. The WISeR model, a six-year pilot program beginning January 1, 2026, uses technology-driven prior authorization to target specific services in Original Medicare that have been identified as potentially wasteful or inappropriate.

It sure sounds to me like denying care that was previously covered absolutely violates the requirement of these programs to "preserve" or "improve" care.

Regarding lawsuits. It sounds like they will be coming. More from AI

No lawsuits have been filed against CMS for the WISeR Model as of late September 2025, but several professional medical societies and lawmakers have expressed strong opposition and concern through letters to CMS due to potential risks of delayed care and increased administrative burdens. While formal legal action hasn't been taken, the significant backlash from key stakeholders suggests the possibility of future litigation if the model's concerns are not adequately addressed by CMS.

[Bengus81]

46. Medicaid not Medicare and the way I understand it is that the cuts are so horrible

they won't start taking until after the mid-terms. Dems in Congress need to pound the hell out of that point big time next year and the mid-terms close in.

[mcar]

2. Kudos to Sen. Schumer

I await the many Schumer critics here to offer their praise as well.

[Skittles]

34. I'll give him points if he holds firm

absolutely - it will make me think maybe he learned a fucking lesson

[MarineCombatEngineer]

3. Why that can't be, I read here on DU that Sen. Schumer and Rep. Jeffries were getting ready to cave.

https://democraticunderground.com/100220684326



Apparently that thread was, if fact, BS.

[Cha]

7. Not the first time..

TY

[sheshe2]

9. Nor the last.

[Cha]

10. Not at this rate.

[lostincalifornia]

15. but they quoted "anonymous sources".

[MarineCombatEngineer]

19. Oh, well then, it must be true,

just like, if it's on the internet, it must be true!

[Justice Brandeis]

5. Keep pressuring Schumer.

If we don't, he'll fold.

[ananda]

6. Maybe all those messages helped.

I was happy to send one I found here
a while ago.

[Baitball Blogger]

8. Am I missing something? He's only one person. Why can't the rest of the Dems vote their conscience?

[BumRushDaShow]

11. The House can easily pass the ridiculous C.R. because they will have the majority (which is needed for passage)

But the Senate needs 60 votes to pass legislation and that means the GOP needs (D) votes and they don't have them.

The split is 53 (R)s & 45 (D)s & 2 (I)s (who caucus with (D)s), so they need at least 7 Democrats to vote with them.

Schumer is the Minority Leader "speaking for" the Senate Democrats.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

13. Yep,

and I believe that the Senate Democrats are in unity on this.
No caving.

[Baitball Blogger]

16. My point is, if Shumer can't lead, why do the other senators have to listen to him?

Right now the Democrats have to show leadership, and stand up to the Right, otherwise, they will be punished in the midterms.

[BumRushDaShow]

17. I understand your and others' concern about his (lack of) "leadership" skills

However he was "elected' by the Senate Caucus as the Minority Leader and thus he becomes the "spokesperson" for the Caucus.

It's basic protocol.

[Baitball Blogger]

18. Basic protocol is what gave us our weak hand.

[BumRushDaShow]

24. You need to become a CSPAN junkie to see how they operate in Congress

At the start of every 2-year Congressional session, "leaders" are chosen as well as either "Chairs" (for the party in the majority) or "Ranking Members" (if the party is in the minority) for all the Committees. It can be a fierce battle as you might have noted with some of the Ranking Member slots like for the House Oversight Committee and House Judiciary Committees.

Democrats CHOSE Schumer after we lost the Senate in 2024 as he had been the Majority Leader before then (since 2020). Prior to 2020, Democrats were last in control of the Senate in 2013, where Harry Reid was the Majority Leader. We then lost the Senate in the 2014 election and didn't regain it until 2020 (barely as it was a tie but swung to (D) due to having the Presidency and Vice-Presidency where the VP is technically "the President of the Senate" and can break ties). At that time, Schumer was the Democratic Caucus Vice-Chair (and Dick Durbin was the Assistant Majority Leader to Reid), and Schumer ran and won the top leadership job.

So from that era, the Caucus had a record of his work in a leadership position. I know that Durbin decided to remain as a Whip vs running for Minority Leader.

ETA and IMHO - Schumer was fine for the "past" but we are in a "break glass" moment, where all bets are off and a different style/tactic is needed (i.e., I get what you are saying but they are not going to completely toss out protocol now but should we make it to the 2026 election, he'll be toast).

[Karma13612]

44. The sad part is that

More and more media consumers are cutting the cord and losing access to C SPAN.

I wish there was a way to get CSPAN without cable. But, it’s a Cable service/product, unlike the legacy networks which are available over the free digital airwaves (NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS).

As always, it’s the public that suffers.

[BumRushDaShow]

48. CSPAN does have a YouTube channel

and will often put some of their segments there (including some live streaming).

https://www.youtube.com/user/CSPAN

[OldBaldy1701E]

45. Or... and hear me out...

Our entire governmental structure needs to be less buried in bureaucratic bullshit and more able to deal with issues like this.

But, as always, this is too much to ask. The reason for this being as convoluted as our congressional procedures is obvious... or, so I thought.

The moment we make our governmental activities more convoluted and difficult to understand, the more we get regimes like the current one as people disengage and find the whole thing impossible to follow or understand.

But, let's keep on doing it.

[BumRushDaShow]

49. What you see today

evolved over nearly 250 years worth of "practice". It's not the same as 1791 but some core things were established back then to trying to keep some structure to it.

But what has also happened is the mass proliferation of litigation, and this is why some things are so complicated because people always managed to find "loopholes" in what was originally considered "plain language" (so then one had to get into the weeds to "explain what was meant" and it went downhill from there).

[OldBaldy1701E]

50. There was a time when those who exploited loopholes would have been shut down by the community.

It would not have taken a court order. People would not have rewarded that behavior with their business, nor their congress. They would not have been able to remain open. They would not have been able to survive... as long as they kept on behaving in that manner, or continued to espouse it. People in general would have shunned them. There would have been no help for them.

Societal/cultural pressure. It used to be the norm. It is still a power, but it is not used in that way anymore.

I wonder why we stopped?

Because, the programming worked.

To continue to employ any aspect of the existing bureaucracy is to perpetuate it. To perpetuate it is to perpetuate the other aspects of what has blatantly become an economically biased and unfair system. To perpetuate that is to continue to alienate large swatches of our society, as well as saying to those same swatches that they just don't matter because they fail to perpetuate everything aforementioned. We sure talk the talk, but when it comes to walking the walk, we keep on shying away from actual, fundamental change that would resolve a lot of said imbalances, because those changes will not be pleasant, nor retain much of the existing power structure that exists today. The last is the particular sore spot with people, which again creates questions that everyone seems to want to ignore.

Why would we want to do that? (Rhetorical question.)

I guess that, as a 'liberal progressive', I expect too much from our societal structure. We don't seem interested in being either anymore. No profit in it.

[BumRushDaShow]

52. I have posted a number of times before

that the concept of the "honor system" has been breached and discarded by 45 and his ilk.

When a court said "NO!", the average person sighed and said "okay". Those with more resources could appeal, including to the SCOTUS, and if those courts said "NO!", then that was that and they walked away.

But this administration not only gave the courts the middle finger, but intentionally and loudly told them that they intended to defy them. And since they "control" the means for "enforcement" of any court defiance (and members of the SCOTUS who have aided and abetted in allowing the defiance), then an example is set, and more and more will defy in the future.

[OldBaldy1701E]

53. Yes.

But, they don't control the number one method of 'enforcement'.

They just convinced us that we should NEVER do that, because it would be BAD. BAD!!

Yeah, bad for them.

But, the programming worked.

I recently read a post on Reddit where the guy said, "I find it funny that most Americans think that they will be able to vote their way out of this."

I admit to finding it funny as well. Doesn't mean I won't vote. It just means I think this is more than a political situation. Solving the political aspect of it won't solve the issue. Thinking that it will is just going to perpetuate it all.

I would prefer to solve the issue while we are in the position of flux. It makes changing things easier. Just as it is easier to build a retaining wall before the tide comes in.

But, I don't see a lot of support for real change. So... I will just have to let go of any aspirations I have about this nation.

It prefers to be like it is. More's the pity.

[BWdem4life]

20. "the president, who was really listening to us"

Um, really?

Even if true, it’s only the last person who talks to him that he can remember what they said.

And anyway neither can compete with the voices in his head.

(Unintentional rhyme, maybe I should be a songwriter.)

[littlemissmartypants]

22. Hurting people in any form is exactly what psychopaths live for. ...

For example ...

"...warn[ing] Trump directly about the possibility that thousands of Americans will see their health insurance premiums soar next year." Is exactly the kind of result that psychopaths enjoy.

Why aren't those "in charge" aware of that?


Tips for how to spot a psychopath like our president:

Characteristics of Psychopaths

1. Aggressive, callous, and cunning
2. Complete absence of conscience and empathy
3. Very adept at manipulating others
4. Willingness to engage in immoral, criminal conduct
5. Willingness to take what they want and do as they please, regardless of who is hurt or wronged
6. Deceptive ability to appear outwardly benevolent
7. Deceptive ability to behave in superficially charming ways to hide purely selfish motives
8. Willingness to use intimidation and violence to control others in order to satisfy their own needs
9. Willingness to intentionally violate the basic inherent human rights of others
10. Complete absence of any sense of guilt or remorse for the harm their actions have caused to others
11. Rationalization of their own immoral behavior
12. Will attempt to lay blame upon someone else for their own conduct
13. Denial, will deny their own wrongdoing outright
14. Utter contemptuousness toward the feelings and desires of their fellow beings
15. Pathological lying, will say anything without any concern for truth to advance their own hidden agendas
16. Ablity to feign [fake] normal human emotions and empathy
17. Distorted sense of the consequences of their actions
18. Total failure to accept any responsibility for their own socially irresponsible ways
19. Strong bellef that they will never be brought to justice for their criminal behavior

[Klarkashton]

27. Apparently he played dumb about what was going to happen.

Either dumb or just stupid either way it's impossibly bad.

[littlemissmartypants]

33. He who played dumb?

[Klarkashton]

26. The elections are far off. Put the fucking heat on those

Bastards now. Shut this horrible shit show down forever.

[pat_k]

28. So, is the only "red line" ACA enhanced subsidies?

What about going after Medicaid cuts?

What about demanding 47 stop violating his oath of office?

[BumRushDaShow]

29. I think Medicaid cuts were also part of that.

The most pressing has been the ACA subsidies that sunset at the end of the calendar year and that would probably be the easiest to fix (just doing an extension). The Medicaid cuts are amongst all the other health-related cuts and there were an obscene amount of them, but might be fixable with legislative language changes.

[sheshe2]

35. Kick and Recommend!

[DFW]

36. Good. Ten days is a brief headline-dimming distraction

Meant only to get the shutdown out of the headlines while they work with Murdoch to figure out how to blame it all on us.

Time to put up or shut up.

And Johnson should finally quit acting like a garden slug and swear in that Democratic Congresswoman, too!! I sometimes think he must maintain a strict salt-free diet to keep from melting.

[tonekat]

40. A great way to keep up with developments in ACA

Is Kaiser Family Foundation:

kff.org

[Bread and Circuses]

41. I hope that Schumer and Jeffries hold firm.

[no_hypocrisy]

43. At the very least, Jeffries and Schumer are on the record for warning TSF

about the consequences of his being obstinate and of his inaction.

The classic "You were told but you wouldn't listen".

[JustAnotherGen]

47. He's going to have to stay strong

[lees1975]

51. What! When did Schumer grow a pair?

?