• The House of Representatives approved a government funding package Tuesday evening. The legislation now heads to the Senate, where it needs 60 votes to pass. Many Democrats and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said they would oppose the measure. 
• Democrats wanted a 30-day extension to give Congress time to reach a bipartisan solution.
• This bill funds the government through Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.

Full Story

The House of Representatives approved a government funding package on a near-party-line vote Tuesday evening, March 11. The measure now heads to the Senate, where it needs to be approved before Friday, March 14. Otherwise, the federal government will shut down. 

Who voted for the bill?

All but one Republican voted in favor of the continuing resolution, all but one Democrat voted against it and two members did not vote. 

“House Republicans stood for the American people and voted to maintain funding the paychecks for our troops, the agents who secure our borders, the TSA workers responsible for safe air travel, as well as the healthcare and benefits for veterans, and essential services and programs that keep the government operational,” Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said in a statement. 

“For years, House Democrats have railed against government shutdowns, but they suddenly changed their tune when President Trump returned to office,” Johnson continued. 

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

Why did many Democrats vote against funding the government?

Democrats contend the funding bill cuts money for affordable housing, community health care and for veterans care. 

“The House Republican highly partisan shutdown-threatening bill is an attack on veterans. It’s an attack on families. It’s an attack on seniors,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said.

Republicans called some of the Democrat’s allegations exaggerations and fabrications. GOP leadership said there are no cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, as Democrats stated. 

While that’s the case for the government funding package, Republicans are also working to approve a budget reconciliation bill that could make cuts to those programs.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, brought forward a 30-day extension to fund the government through April 11. She said that would give Congress time to finalize a bipartisan solution, which she described as “close” to completion.  

“Speaker Johnson’s slush fund continuing resolution empowers President Trump and Elon Musk to pick winners and losers with taxpayer dollars, and make no mistake: it shortchanges families and includes painful funding cuts for bipartisan domestic priorities like cancer research, Army Corps projects, and much more,” DeLauro said in a statement. 

“A shutdown will be the result of the Republican majority walking away from negotiations,” DeLauro added. 

Get up to speed on the stories leading the day every weekday morning. Sign up for the newsletter today!

Learn more about our emails. Unsubscribe anytime.

Enter your email for newsletter updates Subscribe

By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.

What’s next?

The legislation now heads to the Senate, where it needs 60 votes to pass. Many Democrats, and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said they would oppose the measure. 

“We’re trying desperately to keep the government open but not to go with a plan that will give Elon Musk and his boys the ability to wantonly chop up government,” Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., said. 

Some Senate Democrats have expressed support for DeLauro’s 30-day resolution. For the House Republican package to pass, at least seven Democrats will have to vote in favor of it. It’s not yet clear how many will cross party lines.

• Ruth Marcus, a political columnist and associate editor at The Washington Post for four decades, resigned after the paper reportedly refused to publish her critical opinion piece about owner Jeff Bezos. Marcus later said in a resignation letter that, “It breaks my heart to conclude that I must leave.”
• Bezos’s new policy restricts the opinion section to only topics of “personal liberties and the free market.”
• The Post has struggled with staff departures and subscriber losses over editorial shifts.

Full Story

A political columnist and associate editor who worked at The Washington Post for four decades resigned following the paper’s decision to reportedly not run her opinion article criticizing owner Jeff Bezos’s latest changes to the news outlet. In a resignation letter from Ruth Marcus, obtained by The New York Times, she stated, “It breaks my heart to conclude that I must leave.”

Marcus added that her decision, “underscores that the traditional freedom of columnists to select the topics they wish to address and say what they think has been dangerously eroded.”

While it’s not clear exactly what Marcus wrote in the opinion piece, she said The Post’s publisher, Will Lewis, declined to run the column, adding that it was her first rejection in nearly 20 years of writing columns.

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

What editorial changes has Bezos made?

Last month, Bezos announced that The Post would narrow the topics covered by its opinion section to “personal liberties and the free market,” and issued a directive that the paper would not print opposing views.

More than 75,000 digital subscribers canceled in the 48 hours after the policy change, which also saw the resignation of opinions editor David Shipley.

What’s the reaction to Marcus’s resignation?

New York Times columnist David French posted to X following the news of Marcus leaving.

“I frequently disagree with Ruth Marcus, but I’ve never questioned her integrity,” French said. “This is a sad day for Post. I have profound respect for her decision to resign.”

I frequently disagree with @RuthMarcus, but I've never questioned her integrity. This is a sad day for Post. I have profound respect for her decision to resign. https://t.co/8PRaUOa7UL

— David French (@DavidAFrench) March 10, 2025

Political commentator Alan F Jr also posted to X, “I don’t think journalism is different than any other job in restricting public criticism of your boss on the company dollar.”

I don’t know, this qualifies as career suicide, unless she was looking for an excuse to retire. No one’s clamoring to give her as prominent a platform. I don’t think journalism is different than any other job in restricting public criticism of your boss on the company dollar. https://t.co/qG23Kyo31s

— Alan F Jr (@AlanFJr) March 10, 2025

A Post spokesperson said Monday, “We’re grateful for Ruth’s significant contributions to The Washington Post over the past 40 years. We respect her decision to leave and wish her the best.”

The Post has been struggling in recent year. Several other prominent journalists left over Bezos’s changes to the paper, including his decision to not endorse a candidate in the November 2024 presidential election. The editorial staff had prepared to support Democrat Kamala Harris.

That move also led to a mass exodus of subscribers.

• Elon Musk commented on entitlement spending on Monday, focusing on waste and fraud, suggesting eliminating up to $700 billion in federal spending. His statement caused concerns about potential cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
• The White House clarified that Musk did not call for cutting benefits but highlighted the issue of fraud.
• Sen. Bernie Sanders warned that Musk’s remarks could signal a push toward privatizing Social Security.

Full Story

Elon Musk’s recent comments on entitlement spending prompted a flurry of headlines and posts over fears that the Trump administration may cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

“The waste and fraud in entitlement spending — most of the federal spending is entitlements, that’s the big one to eliminate. That’s the sort of half trillion, maybe six, $700 billion,” Musk said in an interview with Fox Business on Monday, March 10.

The Department of Government Efficiency leader’s remarks also raised the question of where he came up with a figure as high as $700 billion.

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

What did Musk mean by ‘big one’ to eliminate?

The White House defended Musk in a statement released on Tuesday, March 11, and said he did not call for cutting benefits. Instead, they said he was focused on the waste and fraud within those programs.

The statement also pointed to an estimate from the U.S. Government Accountability Office that said taxpayers lose as much as $521 billion annually to fraud — most of that within entitlement programs.

But, according to the Social Security Administration’s inspector general, the agency made about $72 billion in improper payments from 2015 to 2022 — less than 1% of the $8.6 trillion the agency handed out in benefits during that time.

Musk did, at one point in Monday’s interview, cite the Government Accountability Office report estimating the government may lose up to $521 billion yearly to fraud, but that report covered the entire federal government.

Sen. Bernie Sanders responds to Musk’s remarks

Numbers aside, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said Musk’s call for cuts in mandatory federal spending is a step in the direction of Social Security privatization.

“Well, he has called Social Security a Ponzi scheme. They have already laid off 2,500 employees of the Social Security Administration,” Sanders said in an interview with CNN on Monday. “If you ask me, I think this is a prelude not only to cutting benefits, but to privatizing Social Security itself. I think that’s in the back of their mind.”

President Trump’s pledge to protect benefits

President Donald Trump has repeatedly said he will not cut Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid benefits, most recently during an interview on “Fox News Sunday” on March 9.

In another recent interview with NBC News, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., talked about reforming Social Security and Medicare benefits for future retirees while protecting those already receiving benefits.

Get up to speed on the stories leading the day every weekday morning. Sign up for the newsletter today!

Learn more about our emails. Unsubscribe anytime.

Enter your email for newsletter updates Subscribe

By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said in a report released on March 5 that Republicans can’t achieve their goal of cutting $2 trillion in federal spending over the next decade without cutting Medicaid.

The current federal budget deficit for fiscal year 2024 is approximately $1.8 trillion.