The government is back open.
It was the longest shutdown in U.S. history at 43 days.
There are lots of questions about what this means, how we got here and where we go from here. Let's answer some:
Why did it start?
The Democratic base has been urging its leaders to show more fight. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer caught tremendous blowback in March for doing an about-face and going along with Republicans to keep the government open despite what the left saw as an odious spending bill.
When the latest funding fight came up, Schumer this time showed a united front with House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries. Arm in arm, they refused to go along with continuing to fund the government and made the key issue extending health care subsidies, which if not extended, would mean tens of millions of Americans would see their health care costs increased.
How did it end?
It ended without the health care extensions Democrats were fighting for. Eight moderate senators crossed the aisle and indicated Sunday night that they had struck a deal with Senate Republicans to reopen the government.
The reason they didn't hold out longer, this group said, was because it was obvious President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans weren't going to negotiate, and too many people were suffering. The Trump administration — correctly — gambled that enough Democrats would not be able to stomach the amount of pain the administration was willing to inflict on the 42 million recipients of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, and more than 3 million federal workers.
So what does the bill do?
The bill passed by Congress and signed by Trump funds the government until Jan. 30 with carveouts for SNAP, benefits targeted at women, infants and children, or WIC, the Department of Veterans Affairs and Congress. Those will all be funded until the end of September 2026.
It notably also tries to rectify the firings and loss of pay to federal workers, although it's a leverage point the Trump administration could use again if the government were to shut down again after Jan. 30.
There is also money for increased security for members of Congress, executive branch officials, judges and Supreme Court justices. Several Republican members were outspoken about this after the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
If the government is only funded until Jan. 30, does that mean there could be another shutdown soon?
It's possible. It depends on a few things. What lessons do Democrats take out of the shutdown? Does the fire within the base subside some between now and then? And is there an actual vote on health care subsidies?
OK, so what about those health care subsidies?
It's not clear yet, but the lack of a negotiation on them likely means they will expire unless enough moderate Republicans, feeling pressure in their districts, cross over to strike a deal with Democrats — and Republican leadership, including and especially Trump, go along with it.
But that seems highly improbable — and tens of millions of people would see their premiums go up.
If that's the case, what was the point of the shutdown?
That's a question a lot of people, especially those left of center, are asking. They see what moderate Democrats did as caving to Republicans.
The reality is, though, the eight moderate senators, who caucus with Democrats and took this deal, didn't want to see regular people feel more unnecessary pain — and they saw no hope for Republicans to compromise after what became the longest government shutdown in U.S. history.
Democrats did accomplish something in this shutdown, though. They elevated the issue of health care, and if Republicans block the extension of subsidies, then they will likely own increased health care costs in voters' minds.
What does this mean for federal workers and flight delays?
Government workers will get back to work, and recent mass layoffs are to be reversed. Furloughed workers were missing paychecks.
As far as airports, there are already signs of easing, but it will likely be several days or more until everything will get back to normal. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy noted that more air traffic controllers are heading back to work, but in the very short term, flight reductions at some major airports will continue.
Were there any surprises?
Yes, there were a few. First, there's drama around a provision slipped in the bill that would allow senators to sue the Justice Department for $500,000 each, if they were subject to subpoenas or had their phone records accessed as a result of DOJ's Jan. 6 investigation.
House Republicans pledged to pass a resolution repealing that provision, but there's no guarantee of that or that the Senate will go along.
There was also a clash about hemp regulation between two Republican senators from the same state. The disagreement between Kentucky Sens. Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul got pretty heated.
The bill also shines a light on how hundreds of local projects are funded — from the purchasing of equipment for a college in the Virgin Islands, the establishing of a veterinary doctorate program in Maryland, urban forest conservation in Texas and asbestos abatement in Alaska to funding for local hospitals, rural community facilities, youth centers, fire stations and so, so much more. It's earmarks — funding not voted on or allocated through the formal appropriations process but tacked on in spending bills — that pay for all of these things.
One day, there will be a vet that will say he or she got a degree from the University of Maryland, Eastern Shore — and it'll all be because of the funding deal to reopen the government.
Is there a guarantee on a health care vote?
No. The moderate Senate Democrats, who crossed over to open the government, thought so, but House Speaker Mike Johnson said shortly after the deal was reached that he wouldn't commit to a vote.
Whether the vote happens or not, if health care subsidies are not extended, it will be because of Republicans — and that will mean they will own higher health care costs heading into an election year.
What does this mean for the Epstein files?
The end of the shutdown meant the swearing in of Adelita Grijalva, a Democrat, who won a special election in Arizona replacing her late father.
That's key because she signed onto a discharge petition trying to compel the Justice Department to release the files associated with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, and her support gave a majority to those who want to see them released. Johnson, who is close to Trump, has argued compelling the release is not necessary — though the president has made clear he does not want them released in full and his Justice Department has not taken public steps to do so.
Even if it passes, though, it will largely likely be symbolic. The Senate is unlikely to get the required 60 votes. Trump would, of course, like it to fail in the House. Colorado Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert, one of three Republicans who have also signed the discharge petition, met in the White House Situation Room, apparently about Epstein. Boebert did not remove her name even after the meeting.
The day the shutdown ended, more investigative materials were released from the House Oversight Committee, including a leak from committee Democrats pointing specifically to emails from Epstein's estate, showing Epstein implying that Trump knew about the girls.
Any day Trump is talking about Epstein is not a good day for the White House.
Who winds up with the political advantage out of the shutdown?
Democrats really upset their base — again. Progressives continue to feel like they get rolled by party leaders. At the end of the day, though, Democrats are likely the ones who got the most out of the shutdown and will have the advantage in the midterm elections.
Consider that Democrats are coming off huge wins across the country earlier this month in the off-year elections. The central issue in those elections was affordability. And through the shutdown, they elevated the issue of health care.
The party and its candidates will likely be able to campaign on both of those issues next year, and with Republicans in charge, that will help Democrats — if they can mend fences with their base, that is.
