Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Senate Set To Pass Bill To Keep Government Open. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired September 30, 2023 - 20:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[20:01:52]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

JIM ACOSTA, CNN ANCHOR: You are still live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Jim Acosta in Washington. Good evening.

Up on Capitol Hill tonight, it's all on the Senate. The Senate now has just four hours -- that's right. Actually less than four hours, to prevent a government shutdown that would hurt millions of Americans. This afternoon the House passed a short-term continuing resolution, and here is how it went down.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The yeas are 335, the nays are 91. Two-thirds being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended. The bill is passed. And without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: The House overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan short-term spending bill. It would provide 45 days of government funding. Just 45 days. It includes federal disaster relief assistance but it does not include aid to Ukraine, which has been a wrinkle in all of this all afternoon. A big, big wrinkle. That has caused a holdup in the Senate, but we have just learned that the Senate will be gaveling into session soon.

Let's go straight to Capitol Hill where Manu Raju has spent a very long day working his sources, chasing lawmakers. He's inside, he's outside. He's back inside again.

Manu, I thought I heard somebody tell me a few hours ago that this is going to be over by now, and you and I could go down the street, get a glass of scotch, have a cigar or something, that this would be all over with. Not so much.

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Welcome to the United States Senate.

ACOSTA: Yes.

RAJU: Any one person can hold things up. And that's what happened this afternoon. Senator Michael Bennet has slowed down the process here because of his concerns over the lack of Ukraine funding in this proposal. But he has been asking for a bipartisan commitment of support to show support for the Ukrainian cause. It appears that's going to happen here.

Now it appears the vote, Jim, and, you know, stop me if you've heard this before, but this does seem imminent. The vote does seem imminent now because of various reasons. One, the number two Republican just told reporters that he expects a vote sometime soon. Another top Senate Republican Thom Tillis says it could happen within the next 10 minutes, and perhaps the biggest indication of all, Chuck Schumer, the Senate majority leader, his office just said he's going to go to the floor and make some remarks.

That is expected to be -- to lock in the vote, the final vote, to avoid a government shutdown after a back and forth and the fears of a shutdown because of GOP divisions in the House GOP. Ultimately Speaker McCarthy changed course, decided to pass a bill with Democratic support along with Republican support, get it out of his chamber, extend government funding for 45 days.

Now that's what the Senate will act on here. But there is still concern about Ukraine and about everything that happened, transpired over the last several days. I caught up with one Senate Republican, Bill Cassidy, about all of this. He did indicate, still, supporting the Ukrainian cause and also indicated that things are just messy. And that's what transpired here over the last several days.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BILL CASSIDY (R-LA): I do support the Ukrainians, both in their fight for freedom, but also their debilitating the Russians because the Russians are coming after us. Our government is messy, and anybody that wants a lovely government should never --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[20:05:05]

ACOSTA: All right. All right. We hate to break into that but let's go to Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer. He's on the floor of the Senate on the effort to avoid a government shutdown.

SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D-WA): Without objection --

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): I move to proceed to HR 5860 which was received from the House and is at the desk.

MURRAY: Motion to proceed to HR 5860, an act making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2024 and for other purposes.

SCHUMER: Madam President, I know of no further debate on the motion.

MURRAY: Is there further debate? If not, all in favor say aye?

SCHUMER: Aye. MURRAY: Oppose nay. Ayes appeared to have it. Ayes have it. The motion

is agreed to.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: HR 5860, an act making the continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2024 and for other purposes.

SCHUMER: Madam President, I now ask unanimous consent there be up to five minutes for debate, equally divided between the two leaders or their designees that upon the use or yielding back of time the Senate vote on the passage of HR 5860, with 60 affirmative votes required for passage and with no amendments or motions in order to the bill, prior to the vote, on passage.

MURRAY: Is there objection? Without objection, so ordered.

SCHUMER: Now Madam President --

MURRAY: The majority leader is recognized.

SCHUMER: I have very good news for the country. Democrats and Republicans have come to an agreement, and the government will remain open. We will have avoided a shutdown. Bipartisanship, which has been the trademark of the Senate, has prevailed. And the American people can breathe a sigh of relief.

But this is a bridge CR, and Leader McConnell and I have agreed to continue fighting for more economic and security aid for Ukraine. We support Ukraine's efforts to defend its sovereignty against Putin's aggression. So thank you. Thank you to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their excellent work. The bipartisanship here in the Senate set the tone for today's result, and I hope it sets the tone for the future. I yield the floor.

MURRAY: The Republican leader is recognized.

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): With just a few hours to spare, the Senate is now in a position to prevent a harmful and unnecessary government shutdown. As I have said for weeks, the clearest path forward has been two pass a straightforward, short-term funding extension that gives us time to continue a number of important discussions about outstanding priorities, from securing supplemental relief for victims of natural disasters, to restoring security and sanity at the southern border that the Biden administration has dragged into chaos, to putting stronger restraints on the president's reckless spending, to supplying Ukraine with even more of the lethal assistance it needs to repel Russia's invasion.

On that particular point, Madam President, most Senate Republicans remain committed to helping our friends on the frontlines, to invest in more heavily American strength that reinforces our allies and deterring our top strategic adversary, China. I'm confident the Senate will pass further urgent assistance to Ukraine later this year. But let's be clear. The alternative to our action today, an entirely avoidable government shutdown, would not just pause our progress on these important priorities, it would actually set them back. And in the process, it would saddle the people we represent with

unnecessary hardships. So I am glad our colleagues in the House have taken action on a continuing resolution that keeps critical government functions going at their current rates of operation. Passing this measure, keeping the lights on, will allow us to return our attention to making headway on full year appropriations our colleagues have been working on literally four months, and it will give us the flexibility to meet urgent supplemental priorities both at home and abroad.

Therefore, I would urge our colleagues to join me in supporting this important step in the right direction.

[20:10:16]

ACOSTA: And we're looking at live pictures right now of the United States as they are about to take up the vote to avoid a government shutdown. You just heard from the majority leader, Chuck Schumer, the minority leader Mitch McConnell. They're in agreement. And let's listen in as this vote happens.

MURRAY: We'll call the roll.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Miss Baldwin, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Bennet, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Booker, Mr. Boseman, Mr. Braun, Mrs. Britt, Mr. Brown, Mr. Budd, Miss Cantwell, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Carper, Mr. Casey.

ACOSTA: Let me turn to my colleague, Manu Raju, who is up on Capitol Hill right now, as we are both watching this.

Manu, if can you help us out, help the viewers out at home, what are we looking at right now? Is this it?

RAJU: This is it, Jim. They reached an agreement. Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell, they announced the agreement and no one objected. They went to the floor and said we want to schedule a vote, the final vote, to keep the government open on this bill that passes the House just today, 45-day extension. They said they went to the floor, nobody objected. That means they locked in the final vote.

And that's exactly what is happening right now on the Senate floor. After McConnell and Schumer both spoke as we heard, now the senators are going to come, they're going to vote aye and nay, and this vote will probably take about an hour or so. It takes a long time for the Senate to vote. It's a very old-fashioned chamber. They still vote by paper ballots. They don't do things electronically like the way the House does. Things take a long time in the United States Senate.

ACOSTA: Aha.

RAJU: Including a single vote. So this vote will extend probably delayed in the 8:00 hour, maybe 9:00 hour, then it will pass probably overwhelmingly. It will be interesting to see how many people actually vote against this measure, perhaps maybe because of what Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell are talking about there. Ukraine, that has been such an issue, so central in the Senate as -- and sowing the divisions between Senate Republicans and House Republicans over continuing support for Ukraine.

Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, is such a staunch advocate for more funding for Ukraine. He sided with Chuck Schumer in agreeing to put $6 billion in Ukraine aid in the Senate's plan to keep the government open until mid-November. That Senate plan is moving through the legislative process. It did not receive a final vote yet. But Kevin McCarthy, the speaker of the House, said it was dead on arrival in large part because it included funding for Ukraine.

That's why the speaker decided to push that aside, move forward with the bill that did not include aid for Ukraine, but kept the government open, would keep the government open for 45 days, includes some aid for national disaster relief, did not go forward with spending cuts as he had been pushing, the border security measures as he had been pushing, because he needs Democratic support, which is how what happened today in a really -- in a really lightning speed in the House, as the speaker retreated from his position.

But nevertheless, they passed this out of the House, now it's into the Senate, after a day-long negotiation with some of the members who were concerned about the lack of Ukraine aid namely Michael Bennet of Colorado.

ACOSTA: Yes.

RAJU: Who wanted some bipartisan show of commitment, perhaps that was there on the floor. We'll see if there's anything else that comes up after this. But they have resolved that concerned. Now they are going to pass this bill.

And Jim, guess what? In 45 days we could be doing this yet again, as they are going to have to find a way to fund the government again, either a short-term spending bill or through the end of this current fiscal year.

ACOSTA: Yes, and the cycle of brinkmanship in the United States Congress continues. And Manu, correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like at the end of the day what we're going to witness here is, yes, the government is going to be kept open. But also, it sounds like the hard stuff is being postponed, put off for another day, and that is a vote on whether or not the United States government will continue to fund aid and assistance for the people of Ukraine in their fight against the Russians.

That did not get resolved today. It got yanked out of the House bill. And over the, I guess, grumbling of some senators in the Senate, it's going to get through the Senate tonight. And that remains an open question now moving forward.

RAJU: Yes. Look, this is what Congress does best. They punt. Whenever they confront a complicated issue, it's punt to the next time and worry about it later. And that's exactly what they are doing now. There's no real clear path about how this gets resolved as long as the speaker maintains, not oppose, he is not saying he's opposed to funding for Ukraine. But he is not guaranteeing it. He's not committing the passing what the White House proposed, which is $24 billion. And that is only a piece of what Ukraine probably needs.

The expectation on Capitol Hill is $24 billion request is just a piece of what Ukraine may need until next year.

[20:15:06]

They may need even more to fight back the Russians in this war that the world is watching in Ukraine right now. And the question is, will that commitment be there from the United States, given the divisions that are growing in the Republican Party, as well as public support in some aspects waning as well. That's raising real concerns about whether this will actually get approved, even though, Jim, overwhelmingly, in the Senate and the House, there is bipartisan support for funding Ukraine.

But the leadership decides in Congress what gets on the floor. And at the moment, Kevin McCarthy has decided not to put Ukraine aid on the floor. Wait for another day to deal with that issue. So we'll see when that day comes, what he ultimately decides, and whether or not this aid eventually becomes law.

ACOSTA: Yes, and that's going to be a day of reckoning, not only for the people of the United States and the government here but for the people of Ukraine because it's one thing for Zelenskyy to go up on Capitol Hill, as he did in recent weeks, and pose for pictures with lawmakers, go over to the White House, meet with the president and so on. That's one thing. It's quite another thing for members of Congress to take these hard votes, to make sure that the fight continues in Ukraine, and that, you know, Putin is not just given a red carpet on the way to Kyiv.

Manu Raju, as always, thank you so much. We'll be tuning in to "INSIDE POLITICS" at 11:00 a.m. as you'll be hosting that show as well. And I'm sure Manu will have more on that when we see him tomorrow. But, Manu, in the meantime stick around because we're not done with you just yet. Want to take a quick break, we'll be back on the other side.

Stay with us. Be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ACOSTA: All right, today a surreal and frantic scramble up on Capitol Hill to avoid a shutdown. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy abandoned his promise to conservative hardliners on increased border security and spending cuts, opting instead to pass a funding bill with mostly Democratic votes. Now the Senate is voting to pass the House bill before the government runs out of money.

Let's discuss with CNN political commentator and "Spectrum News" political commentator, Errol louis.

Errol, your sense of what took place today. And we were just talking about this with Manu Raju a few moments ago. The House speaker had his back up against the wall, it seems. He was not going to get anywhere with his Republican conference alone. There was just too much infighting going on inside the conference. And so he had to work with Democrats to get this done here. And it was really just driving the government to the brink of a shutdown.

We're seeing this take place right now in the Senate, as Manu was just explaining a few moments ago. It's not like the House where a vote can be over within a few minutes. This might take over the course of the next hour or so. This was a close call.

ERROL LOUIS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, absolutely. And listen, what happened is the speaker was dealing with a faction of his conference, about 21 members, who would not take yes for an answer.

[20:20:07]

They said they wanted to tie the government staying open to whether or not there'd be an impeachment hearing. He gave that to them. That wasn't enough. They said they wanted to have deep budget cuts. He put something on the floor the other day, Jim, as you remember, that included 30 percent cuts in non-military, discretionary funding. Deep, deep cuts. They didn't go for that.

They even wanted to sort of do away with the practice of these continuing resolutions that extend government while they're negotiating. They wanted to go through the regular appropriations process, and even those have been making progress. And so at some point I think the speaker decided this is just not worth it. We're not going to shut down the government over something that, you know, can't really be negotiated.

And I don't know if we've heard anybody today who gave some clear indication of what you could have given to these 21 members that would have stopped them from trying to shut down the government. And so cooler heads prevailed. He lives to fight another day. This is not over, of course. He's going to have to deal with his faction of his conference yet again. And they may, in fact, be planning to try and oust him.

But, for now, at least, the good news is that millions of federal workers are not going to have their lives turned upside down.

ACOSTA: And that would have been a giant mess, Manu Raju, who's also with us, had this shutdown occurred. There would have been far- reaching implications and there were some efforts on the parts of some to minimize what would have been a big mess for Americans across the country had the shutdown gone into effect.

But, I guess, to Errol's point, I guess I'm kind of wondering, and maybe I'm being too optimistic here is whether or not some of the hardliners were de-incentivized in this process at the very end. Because they did take things to the brink and they didn't get what they wanted.

RAJU: Yes. Look, I don't think that they're going to back off, though, Jim. I think that they are angry about this. And the question is what they're actually going to do in the weeks ahead. The question that I have is, will this change how McCarthy deals with these hardliners in the weeks and months ahead. This is really the most direct he has taken them on in his time as speaker. He has worked with them, try to keep them in line, knowing that one member could call for a vote seeking his ouster at any moment.

Time and time again, he has sided with them, whether it was a vote on an impeachment inquiry, doing it rather quickly even though he didn't have the support votes to actually launch an impeachment inquiry. He announced it, what happened, because he is getting pressure from those members on the far-right. Or his decision to back off spending levels that he agreed to as part of the deal to raise the national debt limit.

He backed off on those spending levels and sought deeper cuts because of those same members. Those members who held the floor hostage in the House early in the summer, ultimately force McCarthy to cut a deal to actually seek deeper spending cuts, which is the big reason why Congress is in this fight over funding the federal government because McCarthy had to listen to those hardliners.

But today, he took a different approach, took them on directly, and said, I am going to pass this bill with bipartisan support, with Democratic support, something that they were warning him against, and now he'll have to see what the political consequences are of any of that action. So the question I have, will this change his approach in 45 days when they have to fund the government, or any other big issue that they have to deal with for the next you are so? Or, if not, maybe it won't. Maybe he'll go back to catering to that part of his conference. And we'll see if he's able to make amends with them.

ACOSTA: Right. And, I guess, Errol, one of the things that we heard from the House speaker earlier today is that somebody had to be the adult in the room. But I suppose one could argue that he hasn't been the adult in the room every day. And the question is whether or not the adult shows up on Monday. Do mom and dad come back from their weekend getaway or is it still -- or do the kids still run the house?

LOUIS: Well, you know, the kids may still want to play some pranks. You know? And that's the thing to really watch for is that, I think, procedurally, within about 48 hours they are going to be able to really challenge his leadership and that motion to vacate could be in our near future. You know, if you think back to those 15 rounds of votes that it took for him to be speaker, this is a group that does not mind looking bad on national television, doesn't mind holding up the works, doesn't mind bringing Congress to a halt.

I think today suggests that they may have overplayed their hand, but that remains to be seen. They've still got a couple of really strong cards to play. And those, frankly, are cards that the speaker gave them, by allowing any one of them -- I mean, with no numerical minimum at all -- any one of them can decide to bring a motion to vacate. He is just asking for trouble and he might well get it in the next few days, Jim.

ACOSTA: Yes. All right, well, Errol Louis, Manu Raju, thanks to both of you.

And I just want to remind our viewers, you're looking at live pictures right now of the United States Senate floor.

[20:25:06]

It's 8:24 p.m. Eastern Time. We're a little less than four hours to a government shutdown, but the Senate is on a path to approving that short-term spending bill that came out of the House to keep the government running for another 45 days. We heard from the Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, the Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. They've given this legislation their blessing. We're expecting it to pass within the hour.

We're going to take a quick break. We'll be right back in a few minutes, and we'll pick up the conversation from there. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:30:14]

ACOSTA: All right, you're looking at live pictures right now of the United States. The Senate is voting to keep the government running. A bill passed the House earlier today that would fund the government for the next 45 days. The Senate is about to pass that legislation, we believe, in the next 30 to 45 minutes. So of course we're going to keep peeking in on the action there as that develops.

But in the meantime, I want to go back to our Manu Raju, who's been up on Capitol Hill all day long, keeping tabs on everything.

And Manu, I understand you have a statement from House Democratic leaders on this subject of Ukraine and other matters, I suppose, but that's going to be key to all this.

RAJU: Yes, it will be. This is going to be a huge fight in the fall, getting this aid to Ukraine, which is of course not included in this bill to keep the government open for 45 days because of the decision by Speaker McCarthy not to include it in there, given the divisions within his own conference about moving ahead with funding for Ukraine. But in the statement that just came out from the top Democratic leaders, Hakeem Jeffries, and his leadership team, they indicate that they do believe that McCarthy will put this on the floor.

It says, "When the House return, we expect Speaker McCarthy to advance a bill to the House floor for an up or down vote that supports Ukraine, is consistent with his commitment to making sure that Vladimir Putin, Russia and authoritarianism are defeated." It says we must stand with Ukraine and ensure Ukraine's victory.

Now just to unpack this a little bit, McCarthy has not fully committed to having a vote on this on the House floor. He has indicated that it should move separately from this government funding legislation, but hasn't said explicitly that he would put this bill -- the White House has requested -- $24 billion in aid to Ukraine. He has not indicated that that would come up for a vote. These leaders think that some version of that will come up for a vote.

It will be interesting to watch and play out -- this could be tied into the fight to potentially oust Kevin McCarthy from the speakership because of his decision to move forward to keep the government open and rely on Democratic votes to extend government funding for 45 days. That is something that has hogged on, as I've said, could be enough to push him out of the speakership.

But if Kevin McCarthy needs Democratic support in any way to maintain his speakership, those Democrats are going to be seeking some concessions from the speaker. Expect Ukraine, Jim, to be a big part of their ask, as Kevin McCarthy if this scenario plays out. And it's one that is being actively discussed behind closed doors by Democrats and Republicans alike. They're trying to game out the situation. Ukraine could be a big piece of the puzzle here.

Earlier today, Jim, I asked the speaker if he expects that he would need Democratic support to maintain the speakership if they try to push him out of the speakership. He did not respond to that directly. And he went on to say, bring it on. I'm ready to have this fight to become speaker. But he did not say if he would need Democratic votes. But if he does, Jim, Ukraine could be a central part of those negotiations in the coming days here.

ACOSTA: Yes, I mean, it's all going to be riding -- this aid to Ukraine is all going to be riding on what takes place over the next several weeks.

Stand by all of you, if you can. Manu, great, thanks as always for that reporting.

Joining me now to talk about this further is senior associate dean of Leadership Studies at the Yale School of Management, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld.

Jeff, I know you just got back from Ukraine a short while ago, and this is on the minds of the Ukrainians. No question about it. Will the United States stand by us? That is what the Ukrainians have been asking through all of this. What do you make of what took place today?

JEFFREY SONNENFELD, SENIOR ASSOCIATE, YALE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT: No. Thank you. What took place today is, Will Rogers once said, Jim, that I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat. That was an Oklahoma statement. He'd have to reverse parties if you are saying that today 80 years later. Certainly the lack of organization was a problem. But the fact that they would make this a Ukraine versus U.S. issue is absolutely insane. It's just getting back -- as you mentioned, I wrote "Fortune" piece, it was just out the other day, that was highlighting what we heard and saw everywhere in Kyiv and comparing it to what's the rebuilding of Warsaw as a great inspiration.

The spirit is so strong but this is a terrible time to suggest any weakening in our resolve to undermine the enthusiasm of our allies and of course the Ukrainians. But everybody is vulnerable there. This is an incredibly -- a vicious expansionist of totalitarian. And of all things, this is the 85th anniversary, tonight, as we're speaking, of Neville Chamberlain's fateful appeasement plan that pieces at hand now.

ACOSTA: Right. SONNENFELD: By succumbing to Hitler. So how could we, you know,

possibly -- Finland, Poland, everybody is so nervous because they know they're next.

[20:35:03]

This is cheap. This is a small investment. It's not a big expenditure.

ACOSTA: No. You're absolutely right. And as I was talking about with Manu earlier today, now that the House Republicans have gotten this taken out of the spending bill and it's kicked over to the Senate where they feel like they have to pass this now to avoid a government shutdown, it is now a live question as to whether or not -- of course, we think we can get something out of the Senate that would keep funding going for Ukraine. But over on the House of Representatives, it's a different matter altogether.

I'm wondering if you could speak to, Jeffrey, what kind of message this would send, not only to the Ukrainians but the world, if the United States is incapable of keeping this flow of aid to Ukrainians going.

SONNENFELD: It would be horrifying. We'd be reneging on our commitments. Obviously, it puts Taiwan in great jeopardy in addition to triggering alarm throughout all of NATO. But this would, of course, would lead to Putin trampling into countries right on the border. And we'd have some horrific third world war with 12,000 thermonuclear weapons at stake here. This is not a thing to trifle with.

We're looking at not even, you know, 5 percent of the U.S. Defense budget that we're talking about here. The Biden administration has asked for an additional $24 billion. The Senate only cleared a quarter of that, $6 billion. And the House is now sitting on that $6 billion. This is not much money. Of all the money we have spent on Ukraine today, again it's only 5 percent of the U.S. Defense budget or less than 1 percent of the U.S. government federal budget in general.

Every European now -- the E.U. has spent just as much militarily and twice as much in humanitarian assistance. So we're not looking too good on this. It's so shameful. We spent three times this on the Marshall plan, which was money well spent. But I do salute Mitch McConnell on his resolve. There is a U.S. senator, a very conservative senator, Arthur Vandenberg, from the GOP in that 1947, who stood. He was an isolationist, and he stood behind Truman and General Marshall to make the Marshall plan come alive.

And that's the kind of role that Mitch McConnell is playing, bringing his party along here. So I support his resolve. But, boy, this is a terrible signal to put out that there is any uncertainty right now. I mean, there are questions right now about the oil price cap, which have been very effective. And we don't want to take a look at anything which melts down the sanctions or anything that we have done.

We have to redo the oil price gaps as an aside to elevate some enforcement there. But we have seen that Putin -- we've destroyed almost half of his military by estimates. His economy is collapsing. He's surviving only as you and I have talked before on the show, he's surviving only by cannibalizing his economy. Every sector has fallen by 60 percent to 95 percent. The only thing he hopes for is attrition and propaganda to weaken the resolve of the allies, and that's what this messaging does, is to put some self-doubt. Very destructive.

ACOSTA: Well, and at a moment when arguably Putin has sort of fallen on his face in all of this. And to give him a pass at this moment, which is what essentially it would do, if the United States were to stop funding the Ukrainians in their battle against Russian aggression.

SONNENFELD: That's exactly right.

ACOSTA: It would --

(CROSSTALK)

SONNENFELD: -- into the furnace to keep the fire burning. And by the way, keeping things burning, I don't know how you're going five hours straight doing 12 hours of prep for this show. And half the U.S. House of Representatives showing up on this great broadcast. Congratulations to you.

ACOSTA: I appreciate that very much, Jeff Sonnenfeld. And it's always great to talk to you. Thank you so much.

Speaking of somebody who has been working long hours and burning the candle at both ends is Kayla Tausche over at the White House for us.

And Kayla, let me go to you because I know I've had you waiting for a long, long time. What is your sense of what's happening behind the scenes over at the White House because I have to imagine, and I know they're probably going to say, no, no, no, we know there is another bill that's going to get past and Ukraine funding will be there, but I have to think there is just a touch bit of nervousness over there as to how this is playing out.

KAYLA TAUSCHE, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, the White House right now, Jim, is in its own holding pattern, as they await the passage of the Senate bill, which I am told the president will sign as soon as it is received by the White House in order to avert a shutdown by midnight. There is a little bit of a sense of relief that the shutdown is averted, even though the messaging plan all along was to the blame Republicans, and the White House felt like it could do that effectively.

The fact of a shutdown is just a huge headache for the federal government, for the business of governing, a huge logjam for agencies, with tens of thousands of employees that would be stripped down to skeleton crews. And if those conversations were underway, and being able to avoid that is a win in and of itself for the administration.

[20:40:01]

It is also being seen as a victory that they were able to avoid some of those deep spending cuts the Republicans were pursuing. The bigger picture, Jim, I think the White House is seeing this as a victory to finally get that acknowledgment from House Speaker Kevin McCarthy that he cannot go it alone, that on some of these most pressing matters that there are not enough votes within the Republican Party to move forward on some of the harder line positions that he was trying to put forth. And they believe that that acknowledgment gives them a ton of leverage going forward.

On Ukraine aid, yes, there is some trepidation. But you heard Senator Tim Kaine say earlier that, when the White House sent that $24 billion request on Ukraine to Congress in August, that was a stand-alone request. It was never meant to be lobbed into a continuing resolution. Perhaps it's not $24 billion that the administration is able to secure on Ukraine but they do believe that behind closed doors they've gotten assurances from both parties and both chambers that there will be support to move funding for Ukraine.

And they have launched a ton of flags from the Pentagon in recent days, a letter from the undersecretary to congressional leaders, warning that funding has nearly been completely exhausted.

ACOSTA: Yes.

TAUSCHE: And warning that disruptions in fighting on the battlefield are very real and could happen within the coming days.

ACOSTA: Yes, and Errol Louis, I know you are in New York. You just had the U.N. General Assembly rolled through town just a short while ago, and there was all of this talk of standing by the Ukrainians, not just by the United States, but for countries around the world. And, you know, for Zelenskyy to go to New York, make these appeals to the U.N. General Assembly, go to Washington, make these appeals up on Capitol Hill, and at the White House.

I mean, this is potentially a precarious moment in all of this because, as Manu Raju was saying earlier on in this program, there is no guarantee right now from the House speaker that this aid to Ukraine is going to get a chance on the House of Representatives, on the floor of the House of Representatives.

LOUIS: That's exactly right, Jim. And it's very troubling. There is a real sense of history whenever the U.N. comes to town, and it's just a reminder that, in the past, when we didn't take measures early on, and we weren't united with our allies, the results were catastrophic. And that trying to save a couple of dollars or a little bit of trouble on the front end can lead to huge disastrous problems on the back end.

So, you know, in the late 1990s, when Osama bin Laden declares war on the United States, and it's pretty much ignored and not enough is done to sort of track him down, and then five years later, you have 9/11 and an involvement in Afghanistan that lasted 20 years and cost $2.3 trillion, hundreds of thousands of lives lost, 2400 American servicemen, thousands of contractors, on and on and on. You know, the number of wounded, catastrophic results, when a little bit of attention and a little bit of money on the front end could have prevented it.

ACOSTA: Yes.

LOUIS: And this is the message and the lesson of history that I hope some members of Congress maybe who don't understand this are going to hear, that $six billion is cheap for what it could prevent. You know. If you want an ongoing confrontation with Russia as it tries to take over one country after another, and that is the lesson of history, there's no reason to think that it would not continue, we have to do something to stop it.

I mean, that's the message of the Ukraine funding. That was the message at the United Nations. That's what we're hearing from the White House. That's what's being debated in the Senate. And sooner or later, we are going to have to really focus on that. We, in the media, of course, have to remind our audiences what's at stake, that what happens in the next 45 days is going to be about a lot more than just whether or not Kevin McCarthy gets to keep his job.

ACOSTA: Absolutely. 100 percent everything you just said, Errol Louis. I mean, at this point, it's difficult to imagine how the president does not have to go out in front of the cameras to the American people, to the world, to explain the stakes when it comes to funding the Ukrainians in this battle against the Russians. No question about. Russia rolls into a NATO country this becomes a much more expensive proposition.

Errol and Kayla, thank you very much. We appreciate it.

Going to take another quick break. We're going to keep an eye on the Senate floor, see how this vote is shaping up to keep the government running. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:49:13]

ACOSTA: All right, welcome back. Right now, it seems lawmakers will be able to avoid a government shutdown with voting underway in the United States Senate right now. As usual, it's coming right down to the wire. But this piece of legislation that made its way out of the House earlier today, and now sits in the Senate it involves funding the government for another 45 days. So we'll be back in this same spot, it seems, perhaps 45 days from now.

Our Manu Raju is still with us. And also joining us is Catherine Rampell, CNN's economic and political commentator and an opinion columnist for the "Washington Post."

Catherine, I mean, here we go again. And, you know, I was having this conversation with David Gergen earlier this evening, you know, worked for several presidents from both sides of the aisle. And I just wonder, how much more this process can take, this cycle of brinkmanship that we're in right now.

[20:50:05]

And as Manu was saying and others have said throughout the day, we really very well could be in the same place 45 days from now, in a possession position where government workers, military members and so on are worried about getting their paychecks.

CATHERINE RAMPELL, CNN ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think we will be in this position 45 days from now. And to your question, how much more can the system or process take, I wish I knew. I feel like we keep on waiting for the fever to break, and then it doesn't break. Instead it, you know, it just keeps on going. And rather than dysfunction being an unfortunate side effect of parties having ideological differences or whatnot, it seems like it is the goal at this point.

And that's what's really troubling, that when you have one major party in this country with a significant faction that has no interest in governing, and in fact maybe wanted there to be a shutdown of some kind or at least wanted there to be a little bit more turmoil than would necessarily need to be the case, I don't know how you get back to a functional system.

Clearly there are some Republicans who would like to govern, who voted, in fact, to keep the government open. But they have plenty of colleagues who I think are more than eager to cause the same kind of drama 45 days from now.

ACOSTA: And Manu, does this all go back to the deal that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy cut in order to become the speaker, that he's had to sort of operate in a straightjacket, being held hostage by the far- right members of his conference, and that he has to sort of give away the store through each and every one of these processes because that's the only way for him at this point? He has to fend them off until the last second, and then when he's at the brink he cuts a deal with the Democrats. Is that -- is that the cycle we're trapped in?

RAJU: We'll see what happens in the next go round. That could certainly be a repeat. What has been different in this Congress has been the decision by those far-right members to try to hold the House floor hostage, basically the way that legislative process works in the House is you have to approve a rule first. That sets the parameters for floor debate. That happens before you actually can move on to the legislation.

What typically happens is the majority party votes in lockstep for the rule, the minority party votes against it, they have the votes as a majority party to move the legislation. What these hardliners have decided to do in this Congress is to vote to take down those rules. And that mix has really paralyzed action in McCarthy's House. That forced him to cut a deal with these hardliners to seek much deeper spending cuts, which is the reason why the House and the Senate are in much different places over spending levels, and the reason why we're on the brink of a government shutdown that we barely averted because of the demands that were made by those members on the right.

McCarthy forced to acquiesce to those demands, even though he had cut a deal and funding levels with the White House and with Senate Democrats and Republicans, he had to back off of that because those members were using those hardball tactics to essentially hold the House floor hostage.

So, Jim, the question is going to be if they will continue to do that as the legislative process moves forward, as we get into the next funding fight in 45 days.

ACOSTA: Yes, and, Catherine, I guess, you know, perhaps it's not the most productive conversation to have to ask, what would have been the ramifications had the government shut down, but there were a lot of attempts on the Republican side to minimize and downplay what would have happened to these government workers by saying, oh, they would have gotten backpay and so on. But this would have caused real economic pain for millions of Americans.

RAMPELL: Yes, not just the government workers. Obviously there are a lot of Americans who otherwise interact with government services. Maybe they receive food assistance, their kids receive free school lunches, there are these community health centers that are funded by annual appropriations that would have been cut off. Some of those kinds of programs that I mentioned, things like food stamps, would have kept going for a little while, but eventually would have run out of their contingency funding.

So it's bad enough that, yes, there are lots of government workers including troops based abroad who would have gone without paychecks. But beyond that, there are these knock-on effects throughout the rest of the economy that again there is a significant contingent of the Republican Party that either was looking for or more likely indifferent to I guess at this point. I'm very glad we averted those kinds of consequences, particularly since, you know, we've come very close so far, knock on wood, to achieving that coveted soft landing and, you know, skating away from this inflationary period without a recessions which is historically unusual, but we've had a number of other kinds of shocks to the economy.

[20:55:00]

So this would have certainly been an unwelcomed development. And again, I hope 45 days from now we're not in the same situation, but we may well be.

ACOSTA: Yes. Well, I mean, 45 days from now, I don't want to do this again to Manu Raju who has put in a very long but dedicated and excellent day of reporting for us here at CNN.

Catherine Rampell, Manu Raju, I'm supposed to end this at 8:55:00 I'm told. So I've got to toss to a commercial break here. My colleague, Dana Bash, is going to pick up the coverage in just a few seconds from now. But thank you very much for that.

In the meantime, you are looking at live pictures of the Senate floor right now as senators are on the verge of voting on legislation to keep the government running. Something that should have been done a lot sooner than this hour. But in the meantime, thank you very much for joining me this evening.

I'm Jim Acosta reporting from Washington. I'll see you again tomorrow night starting at 5:00 p.m. Eastern, unless something else comes up which means I could come in sooner than that. But hopefully for 5:00 p.m. Eastern. In the meantime, our special coverage with Dana Bash is next after a quick break.

Stay with us. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)