From left, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, Republican of Iowa, Senator Cynthia Lummis, Republican of Wyoming, Senator Bill Hagerty, Republican of Tennessee, and Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin, chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, speak with reporters at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, October 6.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
J. Scott Applewhite/AP
Sen. Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin, says he is “sick and tired” of the current federal government shutdown and has blamed both Republicans and Democrats for the way negotiations are proceeding during federal shutdowns.
In an interview with Morning editionJohnson said shutdowns are often a good excuse for the “united party” — a group of Republicans and Democrats “who are happy to mortgage our children’s future” — to spend more federal money.
“It’s often said, ‘Show me a member of Congress who’s ever lost because they spent too much money.’ That’s our problem,” Johnson continued. “And the other problem is that the American public, as a whole, likes free federal money.”
With the Senate unable to pass either of the two pending spending proposals, most of the federal government remains shut down.
Republicans want a clean spending bill that would fund the government for seven weeks. Democrats insist any measure would have to expand Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies, which are used by more than 20 million people to make their health insurance more affordable. These grants will expire at the end of the year. Democrats also want to reverse health care spending cuts imposed by President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act and limit the president’s ability to withhold funds allocated by Congress.
Johnson blamed high health care costs on the “faulty design of Obamacare” and said Democrats should be willing to work with Republicans to fix “their horrible health care bill.” During his first term – with Republicans in control of both chambers – President Trump did not repeal or replace Obamacare as he pledged to do during the 2016 campaign.
Negotiations like the one underway over health care, Johnson said, can be avoided with his proposal. Shutdown Elimination Act – a bill that would fund the federal government at the previous year’s spending levels in the event Congress fails to approve a spending resolution for a new fiscal year.
Speaking to NPR’s Michel Martin, Johnson discussed the nature of the shutdowns and Republican efforts to reduce health care costs.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Interview Highlights
Michel Martin: We hear there has been no movement among leaders over the past week to end the shutdown. But what about senator to senator, person to person? Is something going on there?
Senator Ron Johnson: Well, let me just ask you: do you like talking about this topic? I’m tired of these standstill confrontations. Last fiscal year—I don’t know how many obstacles we faced—it took us six months to get to a continuing resolution. We find ourselves in a ridiculous situation. So I proposed the Eliminate Shutdown Act. All this does is establish rolling continuous appropriations over 14 days where you have not funded the department or the entire government. That doesn’t stop him. If you haven’t funded a government agency, you’re simply funding it at last year’s levels. This would give the appropriate people time. You know, you find areas of agreement. You know, we passed some appropriations bills before the end of the fiscal year in the Senate. So, again, this is not necessary at all. It’s ridiculous.
Martine: So you made this proposal. This would maintain current funding levels in two-week increments, as you just said, while no funding bill is in effect. It would seem that there would be something for both sides. Expenditures would be maintained at their current level. This would give people the opportunity to negotiate. Your proposal was unsuccessful. Why do you think this is the case?
Johnson: Because he doesn’t spend enough. Spending at last year’s levels is simply not enough for the United Party, and certainly not enough for Democrats and our own. Again, this seems dysfunctional, but understand: this process of stopping confrontations is a well-established process for mortgaging the future of our children.
Martine: But it seems that both parties benefit from it. And because some Republicans voted with Democrats, does that suggest there is something to be gained for both sides? These closures have a certain appeal for both parties.
Johnson: Yeah, absolutely. That’s what I’m saying. The United Party loves shutdown confrontations because they support us in meeting these deadlines. The first will be Thanksgiving. We will not reach an agreement by then. So the next one will be Christmas Eve. And then that gives your appropriate people enough time, a few people, to write up an invoice of a few thousand pages, drop it on our desks and say take it or leave it. And unfortunately, enough people accept it. And that’s why we have a debt of $37 trillion, and an additional deficit of $26 trillion over the next 10 years. It is therefore completely untenable.
Martine: Health care is therefore at the center of this current debate. Democrats say they want to expand subsidies that help people buy health insurance through the Affordable Care Act. In your state, just over 313,000 people purchased their health insurance through this ACA marketplace in 2025. What do you say to these people whose costs will increase?
Johnson: Well I like The Washington Post headline yesterday saying the truth is the Affordable Care Act was never affordable. The reason insurance rates are skyrocketing is because of the flawed design of Obamacare. I think Republicans would be happy to help Democrats fix their horrible health care bill. It was not affordable. This did not protect patients. You couldn’t keep your doctor. You couldn’t keep your insurance. It was a total failure. Free government money, free health insurance – that will always be popular.
Editor’s note: The Washington Post editorial board published an opinion article On October 5, he asserted that “the real problem is that the Affordable Care Act has never been truly affordable.”
Martine: During his first term, President Trump had both the House and the Senate, and Republicans as a group did not solve this problem. So why is it fair to blame Democrats for this now?
Johnson: At the time, I was very critical of our unsuccessful efforts. I’ve always said that rather than talking about “repeal, replace,” we need to talk about undoing the damage caused by Obamacare and moving to a system that actually works. The main problem with Obamacare is that it forces the very small percentage of Americans who purchase their insurance policies on an individual basis to cover the entire cost of covering people with pre-existing conditions. They got rid of the high-risk pools that were working, that could have been changed, you know, and that were actually covering these people. And again, all of the Democrats’ focus on this issue was on a single-payer system.
Martine: But President Trump and the Republicans now control both branches of Congress and the White House. What are your plans to resolve this issue now?
Johnson: So we’re working with health care experts and we’re looking at the flawed design of Obamacare and figuring out how to fix it now. Will the Democrats actually do it? I doubt it. Their idea for fixing anything is just to throw more money at it, which is what they’re trying to do with these pandemic-enhanced temporary subsidies, which, again, just drive up health care costs.
Martine: Well, speaking of money, President Trump is suggesting that at least some furloughed federal workers might not get paid once the government reopens. Do you think this is fair?
Johnson: Again, I think shutdowns are stupid and we can avoid all this. This wouldn’t even be a problem if Democrats simply voted for this continuing resolution. Or better yet, we passed the Eliminate Shutdown Act and we’ll never have to have this conversation again, Michel. And I like talking to you. I hate this conversation. It’s ridiculous. We are in this situation. We can eliminate this forever. But the big spenders, the hoarders, the Union Party love this process because this is exactly how they have mortgaged our children’s future. This is why we have $37 trillion in debt. That’s the big picture.
Martine: President threatens to fire furloughed federal workers. What do you think? I know the federal workforce doesn’t make up a large portion of Wisconsin’s workforce, but what do you think? Do you think this is fair?
Johnson: Well, first of all, when an entity is bankrupt, everyone is laid off, or when you have a company that is in serious trouble, you have to start laying off people just for the company to survive. So that’s what’s happening in the private sector. I don’t know why public sector employees should be immune to the exact same process. We need to start reducing the size of government, its size, its scope and its costs, because, again, we’re mortgaging our future, devaluing our dollar and that’s why people can’t afford certain things. But the shutdown clashes are just a distraction from the massive problem we have with $37 trillion in debt.
This digital article was edited by Treye Green. The radio version was edited by Olivia Hampton and produced by Nia Dumas.
