The Wall Street Journal
WSJ:
Opinion: Potomac Watch
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2025
10/3/2025 6:23:00 PMShare This Episode
Pressure to End the Shutdown? Congress Doesn't Feel It Yet
政府閉鎖を終わらせる圧力？議会はまだ感じていない
The Senate tries again to fund the government and reopen Washington, but it fails, with the same three Democrats voting yes, but no additional takers. Are Republicans preparing to cave on extending emergency pandemic ObamaCare subsidies? Does the White House see this as an opening to remake the civil service? And what about those ideas to avoid future shutdowns?
- pressure to end the shutdown /ˈprɛʃ.ɚ tuː ɛnd ðə ˈʃʌtˌdaʊn/ 政府閉鎖を終わらせる圧力
- fund the government /fʌnd ðə ˈɡʌv.ɚn.mənt/ 政府に資金を提供する
- reopen Washington /riːˈoʊ.pən ˈwɑːʃɪŋ.tən/ ワシントンD.C.の政府機関を再開する
- no additional takers /noʊ əˈdɪʃ.ə.nəl ˈteɪ.kɚz/ 追加で賛同者はなし
- cave on ~ /keɪv ɑːn/ ～に妥協する、折れる
- emergency pandemic ObamaCare subsidies /ɪˈmɝː.dʒən.si pænˈdɛmɪk oʊbəˌkɛr ˈsʌbsɪdiz/ 緊急パンデミック時のオバマケア補助金
- see this as an opening /siː ðɪs æz ən ˈoʊ.pən.ɪŋ/ これを好機と捉える、チャンスと見る
- remake the civil service /ˌriːˈmeɪk ðə ˈsɪv.əl ˌsɝː.vɪs/ 公務員制度を再構築する
- ideas to avoid future shutdowns /aɪˈdiəz tuː əˈvɔɪd ˈfjuː.tʃɚ ˈʃʌtˌdaʊnz/ 将来の政府閉鎖を避けるための案
Speaker 1: From the opinion pages of The Wall Street Journal, this is Potomac Watch
Kyle Peterson: The shutdown in Washington goes into its third day with the Senate taking another series of votes on Friday afternoon to fund and reopen the federal government. Now it seems like little expectation of any progress. Meantime are some Republicans now beginning to hedge on maybe giving Democrats some of what they want later this year. Welcome, I'm Kyle Peterson with The Wall Street Journal. We're joined today by my colleagues on the editorial page, columnist Kim Strassel and editorial board member, Mene Ukueberuwa. As we tape this on Friday afternoon, the Senate is voting again for the fourth time on a resolution to extend funding for the federal government for about seven weeks. The last attempts have failed to reach the 60-vote threshold in the Senate needed to proceed with three Democrats crossing the aisle to vote yes. Those were Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Angus King of Maine. The question now is whether any more Democrats are going to swing over to the I side. One thing Democrats have been holding out for in these negotiations are extended COVID era Obamacare subsidies and notable maybe some movement on the right about having that conversation later. Let's start with a clip of Senate Majority Leader John Thune speaking to reporters today.
- hedge on /hɛdʒ ɑːn/ （慎重に）保留する、様子を見る
- crossing the aisle /ˈkrɔː.sɪŋ ði eɪl/ 党派を超えて票を投じる（反対党側に加わる）
- swing over to the I side /swɪŋ ˈoʊvɚ tuː ði aɪ saɪd/ （ここでは）民主党議員が賛成に回るかどうか
- holding out for /ˈhoʊldɪŋ aʊt fɔːr/ ～を要求して譲らない、待ち続ける
John Thune: We can't make commitments or promises on the COVID subsidies because that's not something that we can guarantee that there are the votes there to do, but what I've said is I'm open to having conversations with our Democrat colleagues about how to address that issue. And I think that that can't happen while the government is shut down.
Kyle Peterson: And here is Vice President JD Vance at the White House press briefing on Wednesday.
JD Vance: I will go to the U.S. Capitol right now and meet with Chuck Schumer or any Senate Democrat if it helps us reopen the government. Most of the conversations, my experience at least have been one off. We're also of course, relying on some of our Senate Republican colleagues who have good relationships across the aisle. We're going to do whatever we have to do is the answer, and I think it's tough to predict what shape this negotiation is going to take over the next few months. But I feel good about the fact that Democrats already realize privately the fundamental irrationality of their position. I hope that they're going to publicly acknowledge it and reopen the government.
Kyle Peterson: Kim, still an effort by Republicans to say the government funding issue is separate from this question over these Obamacare subsidies. But how do you read the Republican positioning there? Your column on Friday is on this under the headline, The GOP's Obamacare Crossroads. What's the argument you're making?
- crossroads
/ˈkrɑːs.roʊdz/
岐路、重大な選択の時
Kim Strassel: Yeah, for all of Republican firm comments that we're not going to deal with healthcare while the government's closed, you have to vote to open the government before anyone can have a discussion. Everyone should note that we are indeed talking about healthcare subsidies, which is exactly what Democrats wanted to have happen as part of their decision to close the government down.
And so to a certain extent, I get it and I see why they're making that distinction. It is correct. They hold a very strong hand. Republicans have passed a bill to keep government funded. It's clean and it is irresponsible for Democrats to be shutting down the government without getting everything they want. But now Republicans are going to have to face a real choice, and that was the crossroads part of this. Which is that if the way that we get out of this is a wink nod or even more of a wink nod, JD Vance saying, "I'll come and talk to you about anything you want." It's essentially a promise that we're going to have a negotiation about extending these enhanced subsidies. The GOP is going to have to decide how do they want to deal with Obamacare, and by the way, this is a decision that is well overdue. The last time the GOP actually engaged on this topic was back in 2017 when it tried to repeal the law, it failed. And then it essentially buried its head in the sand and has not really addressed comprehensively the question about America's healthcare situation.
- make that distinction /meɪk ðæt dɪˈstɪŋk.ʃən/ その区別をする
- hold a very strong hand /hoʊld ə ˈvɛri strɔːŋ hænd/ 強い立場にある、有利な状況にある
- clean bill /kliːn bɪl/ 条件や余計な条項が付いていない純粋な法案
- wink nod /wɪŋk nɑːd/ （非公式な）合図、暗黙の了解
- engage on this topic /ɪnˈɡeɪdʒ ɑn ðɪs ˈtɑː.pɪk/ この問題に取り組む
- bury its head in the sand /ˈbɛr.i ɪts hɛd ɪn ðə sænd/ 現実から目をそむける、問題を無視する（イディオム）
And we've now got these subsidies that are about to expire. Democrats purposely create in that way to put a lot of pressure on Republicans to extend them into perpetuity. But of course, the reason most people's premiums are going to go up this January is because of underlying problems with Obamacare itself, which has been driving industry consolidation, driving higher payments, less transparency. There's a litany of problems which we've covered in our editorial columns, so they can either... At this point, they can, because they think it might help them from an election perspective just extend these subsidies and be the party that went along with making sure everybody was in the bucks and getting federal dollars for ever-increasing health insurance premiums. Or they can bite the bullet and tell Democrats that the price of extending those maybe briefly for a year or so has got to be fundamental structural reform of some underlying regulations in particular in Obamacare that are causing a great deal of damage to the competition in the healthcare market.
- extend into perpetuity /ɪkˈstɛnd ˈɪntuː ˌpɝː.pəˈtuː.ə.t̬i/ 永続的に延長する
- premiums /ˈpriː.mi.əmz/ （保険の）保険料
- underlying problems /ˈʌn.dɚˌlaɪ.ɪŋ ˈprɑː.bləmz/ 根本的な問題
- industry consolidation /ˈɪn.də.stri kənˌsɑː.ləˈdeɪ.ʃən/ 業界の統合・集約
- litany of problems /ˈlɪt̬.ə.ni əv ˈprɑː.bləmz/ 問題の羅列（山ほどの問題）
- be in the bucks /biː ɪn ðə bʌks/ 大金を手にする、金回りがよい（口語）
a buck = 1ドル
bucks = お金（一般に） - bite the bullet /baɪt ðə ˈbʊl.ɪt/ 苦渋の決断をする（いやなことをあえて受け入れる）
Kyle Peterson: One thing we may be waiting for in this impasse also is a clear answer from the polling about who the public and who voters are blaming for this shutdown. Whether it is the president and the party that controls Congress or whether it is the minority party Democrats who are holding out and not playing ball to pass this funding bill. But Mene, I do think that the history of shutdowns is that voters don't like them. It doesn't make anybody in Washington look like they know how to run the place. And I've seen some chortling maybe on the right about government shutdown is a good start, but I do think that misses the pain that it does inflict on people including government workers and members of the military who are not getting paid. As a reminder of that, we have a letter here from listener Tyler that I would like to read a little bit of. He says, "Instead of playing politics with the pay of military members like me, we should get paid and Congress should forfeit its own pay until they can work up funding that meets their political interests. Congress should stop this silliness. My mortgage company does not accept an IOU and neither should military members." He goes on to say, "Please pass along and let it be known that there's a silent majority of military members who are carrying on during this fiscal crisis, but really it's a congressional made debacle that could be resolved by real work instead of political posturing." And Mene, I mean, I get that for people who are not in DC, who don't happen to be on a family trip to a national park where they were hoping and expecting to have access to some kind of public building, the government shutdown may not have really come home yet. But that does not mean that it is not creating difficulties for people and would be a popular thing to continue.
- impasse /ˈɪmpæs/ 行き詰まり、膠着状態
- polling /ˈpoʊlɪŋ/ 世論調査
- holding out /ˈhoʊldɪŋ aʊt/ 踏ん張る、（譲歩せずに）抵抗する
- not playing ball /nɑt ˈpleɪɪŋ bɔːl/ 協力しない、応じない
- chortling /ˈtʃɔːrtlɪŋ/ （得意げに）くすくす笑う、ほくそ笑む
- IOU /ˌaɪ.oʊˈjuː/ 借用証明書（“I owe you”の略）
- debacle /deɪˈbɑːkl/ または /dɪˈbɑːkl/ 大失敗、惨状
- political posturing /pəˈlɪtɪkl ˈpɑːstʃərɪŋ/ 政治的ポーズ、見せかけの姿勢
- forfeit /ˈfɔːrfɪt/
動詞：失う、没収される、放棄する
名詞：罰金、代償、没収物
形容詞：失った、没収された
Mene Ukueberuwa: Yeah, that letter writer is right and that there are real consequences for federal workers, first and foremost of government shutdowns and politicians shouldn't want them to happen. We want to make sure that people who volunteered to work for the federal government, obviously it's a risk that they take on knowing that they're working for the government, the possibility that they'll lose pay temporarily as part of the job, but nobody should want that to happen. And politicians shouldn't intentionally play games with funding these agencies. The question is what are Republicans being asked to give up in order to get the government back up and running? And the position of John Thune and Mike Johnson is basically that ours is the party that was willing to vote for a clean continuing resolution to keep the government funded at its current level. There are a lot of Republicans who would've loved to use the expiration of previous funding as an opportunity to cut government because that's generally what Republicans want to do, but they said, we stepped up and we were the responsible party. We were willing to say, let's actually keep government funded at its current level and we can have more conversations about potentially reducing the size of government later on. The Democrats have a much more tenuous position, which is that even though we don't hold majorities in either chamber of Congress, we're insisting that just to keep the government up and running, just to keep federal workers paid, Republicans have to agree to a lot of cuts to their own programs and priorities to refund Obamacare subsidies. And also to make changes to provisions on healthcare that they just passed in the Big Beautiful Bill over the summer. So it's really the Democrats who are going out on a limb. I do think that there are probably a lot of Republican politicians who are looking at the polls trying to see whether they're going to be blamed, but at a more basic level, they should be able to confidently make the case to the public that we are the ones making the more conservative argument and taking the responsible position of keeping the government funded. We're willing to engage in some of these policy debates alongside of that. But the Democrats are really the ones who have put the government in the position of shutting down because they're insisting on using this moment as an opportunity to make policy demands that are totally unrelated to funding the government in the near term.
- tenuous position /ˈtɛnjuəs pəˈzɪʃən/ 不安定な立場、危うい状況
- go out on a limb /ɡoʊ aʊt ɒn ə lɪm/ 危険を冒す、大胆にリスクを取る
Kyle Peterson: Hang tight, we'll be right back in a moment.
Welcome back. One dynamic though that is different in this shutdown than in past shutdowns, Kim, and you've written about this, is that the Trump administration has looked upon this as perhaps an opportunity. You've written about the arguments by Russ Vought, the head of the White House Office of Management and Budget, that this kind of expiration of government funding unlocks some abilities to do changes and tweaks to the civil service, the kind of stuff that the Trump administration has been doing anyway, kind of DOGE efforts. Do you read that as more of a threat by the White House and an effort to increase the leverage and get some more Democrats to say, we really do want to cross the aisle and to pass this just flat continuing resolution? Or do you think that there is some substance there? I mean, I think there've already been some efforts and suggestions that government unions, for example, would challenge anything and maybe this would all go back to court.
Kim Strassel: Yeah, so first of all, actually, I just want to say one quick thing on our letter writer, totally agreed that Congress should actually have to pay the penalty when there's a shutdown. And I had a great podcast earlier this week with James Langford where he has a proposal where Congress would essentially get locked into the building until they figured out appropriations while a continuing resolution went on. And I think we should all get behind that. But I don't know if I view this as a threat as much as the administration viewing it as an opportunity. I mean, some Democrats are certainly portraying it as a threat, but look, you were talking earlier about blame. My own view is that we'll have to wait and see, as you say, for polls to see what the current blame is as the shutdown goes on. But I know, and I would wager that many in the Trump administration knows that if you look at shutdowns past, Americans might be steamed when it happens and they quickly forget. And it doesn't necessarily turn into a lasting hit on one party or the other to have engaged in a shutdown. And if that's the case, then this administration might instead be looking at this rather as what can actually be done in the moment that we have a shutdown? How can we end this? I mean, forget about the blame, but how do we... On the day this actually ends, have we made some progress on some of our priorities? What is the opportunity to use this moment where there's no government funding for things that have been long-term ambitions for us? I think that is what you are seeing. Russ Vought and Donald Trump have made no bones of the fact that they'd like to cut some agencies. If you looked at the Trump budget that was submitted earlier this year, there was a list of 46 smaller little agencies. These are things like the Institute of Peace or Job Corps or some of these things that they asked Congress to shut down. They're taking advantage of the fact that there's no money for these programs at the moment because of Congress's decision to say, look, one of the biggest reasons we've ever had historically in government for sending out massive reduction in force notifications, they're usually always upheld, is that there's no money to pay for the people to do these particular programs. So they're going to use this as an opportunity to send out RIFs. And we are hearing that some of those notifications could be coming soon. I think some of this is a little bit maybe more targeted Russ Vought coming out and saying, "Yeah, we can't finish some of those infrastructure project money deals that you guys need in New York folks because we had to lay off our whole civil rights department that's supposed to look at it for all these different aspects of it complies with civil rights law. So until that happens, I guess you're just not getting any money for your tunnels and your bridges." I'm sure that is directed to some degree at Chuck Schumer and it certainly got attention. But both sides would like to try to impose some pain on the other side as a result of a shutdown. The unfortunate thing for Democrats is they have very few tools with which they can do that in a shutdown, whereas this administration, which runs the shutdown, has a great deal of leverage.
- continuing resolution (CR) kənˈtɪnjuːɪŋ ˌrɛzəˈluːʃən 継続予算決議（暫定的に政府資金を維持する法案）
- locked into the building lɑkt ˈɪntuː ðə ˈbɪldɪŋ 建物に閉じ込められる（比喩的に「外に出られない」）
- long-term ambitions lɔːŋ tɜrm æmˈbɪʃənz 長期的な野望、長期目標
- reduction in force (RIF) rɪˈdʌkʃən ɪn fɔrs 人員削減通知
- made no bones of meɪd noʊ boʊnz ʌv ～を隠さなかった、はっきりと表明した
「no bones of the fact = その事実を包み隠さない、はっきり言う」
13:35
Kyle Peterson: One thing the shutdown has affected is the expected Friday release of the monthly jobs numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That not happening today, Mene, otherwise, we would probably be talking about that and given the recent numbers in reports the last couple of months, maybe the Trump administration doesn't mind that so much at this moment. But it does raise questions of where the economy is going. Probably not a big deal if this gets delayed by just a few days, but the longest shutdown in government history ran for 35 days. And that would be a long period to not have a temperature check on the jobs market, the labor market. Especially as President Trump continues in recent days to add on new additional tariffs, saying he is going to start charging 10% on foreign softwood lumber as well as using national security powers to put 25% tariffs on kitchen cabinets, vanities, certain furniture items. Let's take another letter while we're on the topic of tariffs. This is from Michael. He says he wants us to explain why Americans who order goods online from other countries are having tariffs collected by shippers like FedEx, UPS and DHL. He said he recently ordered some items for Oktoberfest, including later hose and a shirt and some shoes, and got bills from DHL for about $22, FedEx for $6, UPS for about $17. He says, "I think many Americans would be very surprised as I was to learn that this is happening." Mene, you have written about this in some detail, so please fill us in on what's going on here.
vanity /ˈvænɪti/
家具・建築の分野 洗面台、特に収納付きの洗面化粧台
例：a bathroom vanity → 「洗面台（収納付き）」
一般的な意味 虚栄心、見栄
Mene Ukueberuwa: Sure. Well, those fees are a direct consequence of a very recent policy change, wherein the administration cancelled the exemption for de minimis purchases. So generally, people or companies who were importing goods into the United States for a value of less than $800 were able to avoid the tariffs that usually would be attached to imports from that country. And this had become an issue that a lot of lawmakers were focused on, particularly because of how Chinese companies were building entire business models around de minimis. For listeners who are familiar with Temu and Shein, these big retailers in China, that was exactly what they did. They would sell directly to U.S. consumers and because their goods were cheap, much less than $800, they wouldn't have to pay any tariffs. So there was a lot of consensus among lawmakers to say, we need to close this loophole on the Chinese companies. The more baffling thing is that the administration then went much further than that and decided to close the de minimis exemption for all countries around the world. So that left a lot of Americans who buy hard to find specialty goods from different countries, including allied countries or people that are looking for custom parts for an engine or something like that, stuck paying these tariffs. There was a lot of chaos and confusion, and so it's funny to imagine what the administration's purpose was in canceling it all around the world. I don't think that there are too many domestic lederhosen producers who are going to benefit from the cancellation of the de minimis exemption. And so it's going to be a big headache for a lot of Americans looking to buy rare goods with not really much benefit to make up for that.
- de minimis exemption /diː ˈmɪnɪməs ɪɡˈzɛmpʃən/ 小額免除制度（一定額以下は関税免除）
- loophole /ˈluːphoʊl/ 抜け穴、法の抜け目
- hard to find specialty goods /hɑrd tə faɪnd ˈspɛʃəlti ɡʊdz/ 入手困難な専門商品
- allied countries /əˈlaɪd ˈkʌntriz/ 同盟国、友好国
- make up for /meɪk ʌp fɔr/ ～の埋め合わせをする、補う
Kyle Peterson: Hang tight, we'll be right back after one more break.
Don't forget, you can reach the latest episode of Potomac Watch anytime. Just ask your smart speaker, play the Opinion Potomac Watch podcast.
Speaker 1: From the opinion pages of The Wall Street Journal, this is Potomac watch.
Kyle Peterson: Welcome back. Kim, back to the conversation by the shutdown breaking news as we have been taping this, the Senate has failed to fund the federal government a vote of 54 to 44, the same three Democrats voting with Republicans, Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Angus King of Maine. That means that the shutdown is probably going to extend at least until next week. The Senate expected to be out of session over the weekend, so another round of votes on Monday. Kim, I mean, do you see any real exit ramp for the two parties that they are opening yet? I mean, an obvious one would be for Republicans to give Chuck Schumer everything he wants. Or for Chuck Schumer to say, "Okay, we've had enough pain here now. We're going to reopen the government. And I will accept that meeting and have that conversation with JD Vance that he has promised." But are those the only options or where else do we go here?
Kim Strassel: This failed vote today does not surprise me at all for the simple reason is that there just hasn't been enough. I mean, you can feel that in Washington that both sides, they don't even feel like they've really had a chance yet to dig in and make their argument. Because the administration has done this before and actually had some pretty slick contingency plans in place for doing another shutdown. I don't think that there's actually been an enormous inconvenience for the majority of Americans, and I do take into account our letter writer. There are people in the military who are not getting paid, air traffic controllers who are not getting paid, other federal employees not getting paid. This is a problem. And if it goes on too long, it could really cause hardship in some families, but we're not there yet, and that's the point. Now I see two exit ramps. One is that the leadership decides that they're going to climb down here and take that wink nod from the JD Vances of the world and say, okay, we feel as though we have an honest agreement from the Republicans that they're going to sit and deal honestly with us on a healthcare discussion, and so we've agreed to let this go forward. That's one option. I see that as less likely because Chuck Schumer is under so much pressure from his base to continue to put up a fight, and that pressure is not ceasing, it's just ramping up. The other option is that you get more moderate Democrats who join the three that had already voted and they slowly trickle up, and this kind of takes the heat off Chuck Schumer. He can say, "Look, I have no control over each of my members of the party. They all decided to do this." Look, this is the thing that I'm looking for though, because we all know that it's actually usually forces quite aside from politics or principle that causes politicians to act, watch for next Friday. Next Friday is the beginning of a three-day weekend for the Congress because of Columbus Day on Monday, but it was also because that holiday is followed by what was supposed to be a work session back in states. The legislators have been counting on having at least a whole week off. And there are all kinds of legislators who are signed up for CODEL trips overseas. And if John Thune, for instance, on a Friday were to say, "I'm going to make everybody stay here to keep having votes to see if we can open the government," everybody's suddenly going to miss all those fun trips to all those foreign countries. That would be the moment that I might expect everyone decides that they can get this sorted out in about 20 minutes.
- dig in and make their argument /dɪg ɪn ənd meɪk ðɛr ˈɑːrɡjumənt/ 徹底的に議論する、自分の主張を展開する
- slick contingency plans /slɪk kənˈtɪndʒənsi plænz/ 巧妙な緊急対応策
- exit ramp /ˈɛksɪt ræmp/ （比喩）出口戦略、逃げ道
- wink-nod /wɪŋk nɑd/ （比喩）「さりげなく合意」「暗黙の了解」
- ramp up /ræmp ʌp/ 強化する、増大させる
- trickle up /ˈtrɪkəl ʌp/ 徐々に上に伝わる、次第に広がる
- CODEL trips /ˈkoʊdəl trɪps/ 議員団公式視察旅行（Congressional Delegation trips）
Kyle Peterson: But to that point, the point about putting the pain on Congress instead of the pain on these federal workers who are furloughed or having to show up to do their essential jobs, Mene, what do you make of these ideas to end government shutdowns? We had Senator Ron Johnson, Wisconsin on the podcast last week talking about his proposal, which would basically do automatic continuing resolutions, keep funding flat for those sections of the government that do not have appropriations bills passed. So that would let Congress take these pieces one by one and not veer into a government shutdown if they can't get all 12 of them through. Maybe part of the criticism of that is that it would be too easy then for Congress just not to pass those bills. I mean, I do think that's one of these concerns about letting spending just go on autopilot. So I don't know, maybe the Langford idea is lock them all in the building with no takeout food until they pass some kind of a spending package. Maybe that's the way to go.
- putting the pain on ~ /ˈpʊtɪŋ ðə peɪn ɑn/ ～に負担・痛みを押し付ける
- furloughed /ˈfɜːrloʊd/ 一時解雇・休職させられた
- automatic continuing resolution /ɔːˈtɑːmətɪk kənˈtɪnjuɪŋ rɛzəˈluːʃən/ 自動継続決議（予算案未可決でも資金を維持）
- keep funding flat /kiːp ˈfʌndɪŋ flæt/ 予算を現状水準に維持する
- veer into a government shutdown /vɪr ˈɪntu ə ˈɡʌvərnmənt ˈʃʌtdaʊn/ 政府閉鎖に陥る
- on autopilot /ɑn ˈɔːtəˌpaɪlət/ 自動的に、監督なしで進行する
Mene Ukueberuwa: I think that you do want to have Congress make an affirmative decision to fund the government each year. Because it creates an opportunity for lawmakers to revisit the spending levels that they'd like to approve, to potentially reform bad programs, et cetera. And so to have them basically have to have that conversation and not put it on autopilot, ideally would be an advantage. I understand that it does seem to create more trouble than benefit at this point because of the polarization on Capitol Hill and lawmakers who always want to abuse the process for their own far out priorities, we do get these periodic shutdowns. But I do think that it would be too drastic to say we're going to just have funding automatically extend itself because then you aren't getting reforms. But I completely understand people saying that lawmakers should have some skin in the game because they're not dealing with any of the consequences of their own intransigence. I think the fact that we don't have any penalties for members of Congress or anything like that shows how far we've descended. It probably would've been unthinkable to past generations that Congress would fail in its responsibility to go through the ordinary appropriations process every single year, and we would even be contemplating making them lose pay or suffer in some way just to get them to do the most basic part of their job. But we have reached such a point in American politics that I don't fault people for thinking of those kinds of inventive solutions so that we can get out of this recurring problem of government shutdowns.
- affirmative decision /əˈfɜːrmətɪv dɪˈsɪʒən/ 肯定的・能動的な決定
- put it on autopilot /pʊt ɪt ɑn ˈɔːtəˌpaɪlət/ 自動運転状態にする、勝手に進める
- intransigence /ɪnˈtrænsɪdʒəns/ 強硬姿勢、妥協しない態度
- skin in the game /skɪn ɪn ðə ɡeɪm/ 自分も責任やリスクを負うこと
- descended /dɪˈsɛndɪd/ 堕落した、低下した
- inventive solutions /ɪnˈvɛntɪv səˈluːʃənz/ 創意に富んだ解決策
Kyle Peterson: Thank you Mene and Kim. Thank you all for listening. Thank you to those members of our military and essential workers who are doing their jobs even when Congress isn't. You can email us your own shutdown reactions to pwpodcast@wsj.com. If you liked the show, please hit that subscribe button and we'll be back next week with another edition of Potomac Watch.