Triple Down on Shutdown – February 13, 2026

Here we go again, a third shutdown, even if partial, for this current 119th United States Congress all over one subject. Funding for DHS, a fight set up roughly 2 weeks ago when Congress finally got through the chambers a funding package to end of fiscal year for everyone but this one department.

Anyone that did not see this coming… okay, sure.

Even more concerning is that most members of Congress departed the hill yesterday and by schedule are not due back for some 11 days. Congressional leadership sent everyone home after “negotiations” made no progress towards a deal.

Battlelines were drawn weeks ago, even before Congress figured out funding for everyone else.

Republicans made an “offer” that basically addressed 2 or so of the 11 or so items that Democrats are demanding, but this seems to boil down to a sticking point on the overall tactics of DHS and ICE. In some ways a concession of body cameras does not in the opinion of Democrats address the bigger issues of accountability nor arguably the biggest item of a lack of use-of-force standards. De-escalation, that sort of thing.

At the end of the day Democrats want DHS and ICE reined in, whereas Republicans want largely status quo of activities seen in Minnesota exploding elsewhere. And as usual the distance between those wants is no where near resolved.

The Political Battlelines

One item to consider is that the battlelines drawn politically are a series of designed false dilemmas.

“What it appears to me, at least at this point, is happening is the Democrats, like they did last fall, they really don’t want the solution. They don’t want the answer. They want the political issue.” – Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD.)

“The administration doesn’t actually want to reform ICE. They never do it on their own. That is why we need, we are fighting for, legislation to rein in ICE and stop the violence.” – Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D -NY.)

Question – That seem to you that the Senate is anywhere close or even that there is any sense of optimism?

Better question – Does that not all seem like political social media ready rhetoric, designed for target audiences, and perhaps is not all that indicative of whatever is going on behind closed negotiation doors?

No matter what, Republicans fully aware of their slim majorities House and Senate handled this a long way back with the One Big Beautiful Bill with a stashed away slush fund of about $170.7 billion available until 2029. In fairness, unsure how much of that is still available, some sources suggest about $75 billion is usable now during this funding fight, but the point being that DHS and ICE are still functional to some degree.

A shutdown on paper, for lack of a better way to put it.

Speaking of rhetoric, and probably still a bit red-faced over some Republican defections over Canada and tariffs, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA-4th) chimed in with “I saw the last proposal sent over from the White House. It is eminently reasonable. It seems to me, the appearance here is that some Democrats, House and Senate, want a government shutdown. They want to impose more pain on the American people. For what? I have no idea.”

You could characterize that as drama queen rhetoric, all things considered just about all of the government is functional today. The mention of “pain” is more likely about Republicans unable to move many needles in the area of negotiations as Trump himself is pushing full steam ahead on DHS and ICE.

Trump told reporters just yesterday that Democratic proposals would “needlessly hamstring” immigration agents and “They want our law enforcement to be totally vulnerable and put them in a lot of danger.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY-8th) has made plenty of statements to the media as well, but is at least more clear than the others grabbing mic time in that a redline for Democrats is the central issue of wanting judicial warrants over internal administrative warrants. A real impasse as that would significantly alter how DHS and ICE handle roundup style raids as well as random stops of anyone brown and not speaking English.

False Dilemmas, Drama Queen Statements, other Fallacies

“Enforcing federal immigration law isn’t optional… The safety of the American people and the rule of law isn’t a game” – Keith Self (R-TX-3rd)

“If the Department of Homeland Security is defunded, the pain will extend throughout the country… Democrats know what the Department of Homeland Security does” – Senator John Barrasso (R-WY)

“DHS and ICE are there disobeying the law on a daily basis” and continuing to fund DHS is a “blank check for chaos” – Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT)

A false dilemma from Republicans to consider is the concept of disagreeing with how they are going about immigration enforcement means you are “pro criminal.”

Another false dilemma and borderline drama queen sentiment is that DHS and ICE are running around “lawless” and causing “chaos.” In some instances clearly yes, in every instance is a bit much. The consideration being, who is being truthful or even productive in all this back and forth.

So, what is going on?

With just about everyone on the hill going somewhere else the immediate answer is not very much.

It appears Republicans are banking on OBBB funding during this latest dispute giving them no real rush politically to cave even if Trump seems none too pleased about current conditions. We have to keep in mind this issue, handling immigration, was core to his 2024 campaign to a 2nd term win. And in opposition, Democrats are banking on public sentiment being on their side. By the various polls, it is Democrats with the edge as whatever behind closed doors and largely via one off conversation based negotiations are happening perhaps continues.

Voter sentiment headed into the midterms always on our minds, it is unrealistic for Congress to suddenly allow something “bold, meaningful, and transformational” in how DHS and ICE runs around the nation. Capturing and deporting everyone Trump and Republicans clearly want out.

It is sadly reasonable to expect the rhetoric to increase.

Secretary Kristi Noem has already suggested Democrats are using federal families as “political weapons,” and Democrats have already countered with more and more “lawlessness” style rhetoric. What did everyone expect?

What is caught up in this is under the DHS umbrella includes the Transportation Security Administration (TSA,) the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA,) and the Coast Guard to name a few. Those aspects could be considered “harm” to the nation in one or more ways. An argument could be made that collateral damage from this debate in Congress is actually a national security issue.

In the coming days and weeks, consider how this further plays out and keep in mind the clear wedges for the subject of DHS and ICE are about oversight and visibility, adding in judicial function, and agent engagement of the general public.

Absolutely nothing Republicans and Democrats agree to, if they ever agree, will prevent the next Renee Nicole Good or Alex Pretti style killing. Protests and monitoring will still occur, the Trump Administration will treat them all as “domestic terrorists,” and the likelihood of violence and loss of American life remains. And speaking of Good and Pretti, very little is happening on the accountability front anyway. Some “investigations,” we are told, that seems to be lost in the same pile of work from the Epstein fiasco.

What we can consider (and wish for) is that Federal Agents in the DHS and ICE umbrella of agencies act like every other function of law enforcement. Trust is not reestablished by the angry demands of a President via Truth Social, nor is is handled by alternative rhetoric on “chaos” being caused no matter what is done.

Before Democrats go too far down the familiar road of “defund the (something)” they may want to consider what that did the last time that became one of many political war cries that did not fair too well in moving or keeping votes.

Delia Ramirez (D-IL-3rd) and Jesús “Chuy” García (D-IL-4th) have already gone there, calling for “abolish ICE and dismantle DHS,” moving other departments around, etc.

2016 is still a lesson, as is 2024, in how Democrats engage in the quest for needed change based on voter distrust and dislike of government actions. This time all headed into an interesting and perhaps pivotal midterms.

Democrats have a choice to make that is not a false dilemma this time.

Going with listed achievable goals aiming for substantial change, or their own triple down on a series of rallying cries that are some variant of cancel culture mentality. Excites the base, not so much others. In a manner that has too much potential to send independents and non-party loyalists candidate shopping.

Or far worse, simply keep far too many voters at home.

Those very voters that modern liberalism, clearly by their own rhetoric and rarely speak well of, cannot stand. However, they also would never openly admit they damn well know they need them to win and hold seats.