Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer placed onus on Republicans to avert a government shutdown Wednesday and urged President Donald Trump to meet with Democrats to negotiate ahead of the looming Tuesday deadline.

In an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Schumer said he was hopeful the Senate could achieve a stopgap bill by next week but handed responsibility for a potential shutdown to Trump and GOP lawmakers. The president on Tuesday backed out from a planned meeting with Democrats to discuss a deal.

“It’s so easy to just sit down and talk to us, and we know we’re not going to get everything, but he’s not even doing that,” Schumer said. “And the American people are going to say, ‘WTF? Why won’t he do that?’ There’s no good reason.”

In a post to Truth Social on Tuesday, Trump said that “after reviewing the details of the unserious and ridiculous demands being made by the Minority Radical Left Democrats in return for their Votes to keep our thriving Country open, I have decided that no meeting with their Congressional Leaders could possibly be productive.”

Trump canceled the meeting after reportedly meeting with House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, as House GOP leaders worried a meeting between Democrats and the president could undermine Republicans’ leverage.

Schumer appeared confident in the interview that Americans would place blame on Republicans if Congress can’t come to an agreement in time to avert a shutdown, rather than blaming Democrats for holding out for a deal.

“Ask the Republicans,” he said. “First, they control the show. They have the presidency, they have the Senate, they have the House, so they’re in charge. And God forbid there’s a shutdown — which we don’t want — American people are going to know they’re in charge and say, ‘what the heck?’”

Schumer said Democrats are continuing to request a meeting with Trump, though he said Trump has been advising Republican lawmakers to “ignore the Democrats.”

“He said he doesn’t need Democrats,” Schumer said. “Well, then he doesn’t know how to count because there are 60 votes in the Senate that you need to pass this, and he’s got 53.”

Any resolution to the shutdown standoff now gripping Capitol Hill will have to involve senators from both parties locking arms. It would probably help if the two top party leaders in the Senate would start talking to each other first.

Instead, a frosty pall has settled over the working relationship between Majority Leader John Thune and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, with the two Senate veterans bickering over the path forward for a shutdown-averting stopgap bill.

As of Tuesday evening, neither man had spoken to the other on the subject, with each saying the other bears the burden of actually starting any conversation.

The stalemate between the two, who have served in the chamber together chummily for decades, encapsulates the partisan tensions that have raised the odds that Congress will fail to act and government agencies will close at midnight Tuesday.

Schumer in recent days attempted an end run around Thune, going directly to President Donald Trump with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries to demand a meeting. After the White House moved to arrange that meeting, Thune and Speaker Mike Johnson relayed their concerns to Trump, who then canceled it.

It’s just the latest instance of the two leaders, who are each balancing larger political pressures, not being on the same page since January. But now, with the stakes as high as they’ve been all year, some senators are hinting it’s time for a thaw.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said he believed Schumer and Thune could “figure this out” if only they could figure out how to get a conversation started.

“When people have offices very near each other and know each other’s phone numbers, I don’t think they should, ‘You gotta call me’ — ‘No, I gotta call you,’” he said. “Both need to be talking.”

But so far Schumer and Thune appear dug in. Schumer’s view is that Thune needs Democratic votes and thus should be reaching out. Thune’s view is that there is nothing to negotiate at the moment given that Republicans are offering a “clean” seven-week funding extension similar to ones Democrats have supported in the past.

It’s not clear what would come of any conversations, with senators skeptical that either leader will readily move from their current positions. While the New York Democrat is demanding a “bipartisan negotiation” centering on health care — primarily soon-to-expire health insurance subsidies — the South Dakota Republican sees no reason to cut a deal now on something that won’t go into effect until the end of the year.

Thune accused Schumer of trying to take funding “hostage” to satisfy his base, while Schumer said Thune is blindly following Trump’s lead as the president appears stuck in “go-to-hell mode.”

“I don’t think they’ve been sharing hugs,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said about the two leaders.

The chilly relationship is a rather new development. Schumer and Thune have served together in the Senate for more than 20 years, including overlapping on the powerful Finance Committee. Even into the first Trump administration, Thune spoke about his regular run-ins with Schumer in the Senate gym.

Late last year, as Thune prepared to take over from Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) as top GOP leader, Schumer took to the floor to congratulate him, saying that “we’ve done many bipartisan things here in the Senate together.”

But since Thune officially moved into the job in January, the two haven’t had a regularly scheduled meeting — unlike Thune and Johnson. And unlike McConnell, Thune hasn’t yet needed to lock arms with Schumer to deliver significant legislation — something the Kentucky Republican did on a debt ceiling hike, Ukraine aid and multiple rounds of federal help during the coronavirus pandemic.

Their biggest test, in fact, could be what comes after Oct. 1 — whether that’s finding their way out of a shutdown or notching the sweeping end-of-year funding deal envisioned by appropriators.

Thune said in a recent interview that, while he sits down with Schumer “occasionally” or they chat on the floor, their talks are “spontaneous” or driven by the “need of the minute.”

Their perfunctory working relationship has been on full display for their colleagues recently. They didn’t speak during a recent negotiation to tee up competing Republican and Democratic stopgap bills for a vote last Friday. They instead let top staffers, who have a good relationship and talk with each other almost constantly about routine Senate business, sort it out.

Thune has ceded most of the day-to-day talks over the larger government funding bills to Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine), who is still optimistic about being able to strike a deal with the House on three full-year bills. But when asked about a shutdown-avoiding stopgap, she pointed back to Thune and Schumer: “I think that has gone to the leadership level.”

Thune and Schumer did speak on the Senate floor during unsuccessful negotiations around rules changes for nominations earlier this month. But Thune later joked that Schumer “couldn’t get out of that meeting fast enough.”

Both leaders’ political calculations are playing into the pas de deux. Schumer is under fierce pressure from the Democratic base to counter Trump and Republicans after caving under similar circumstances in March. (He and Thune did speak in the lead-up to that widely criticized vote.)

The New Yorker is now insisting Republicans will bear the brunt of the political fallout following a shutdown since they control both chambers of Congress and the White House. Speaking to reporters after the Senate voted down two dueling funding bills last week, Schumer said Republicans will “absolutely” be blamed, adding that “the world is totally changed from March.”

Thune, meanwhile, has to navigate Trump’s unpredictable machinations. Back in July, Thune, Schumer and their deputies sought to negotiate an agreement that would have expedited the confirmations of some administration nominees in return for the release of frozen agency funding. A deal was close, but Trump wouldn’t get on board, telling senators to go home instead — handing Schumer the opportunity to declare a small victory.

That unpredictability was underscored again by the White House meeting that was scheduled and then unscheduled at GOP leaders’ behest Tuesday. Thune also has to factor in that Trump has yet to sketch out a position on Democrats’ baseline demand: extending the health insurance subsidies that expire on Dec. 31.

The South Dakotan has been careful not to get ahead of Trump this year on legislation, knowing that if the president stakes out a different position it could put him, and his GOP members, in a politically awkward spot. Furthermore, he sees no reason to address a deadline that is still months away.

“Eventually, ultimately, the White House and Schumer are going to have to probably sit down,” Thune said in a brief interview earlier this month. “But I think right now what we’re talking about is short-term.”

Katherine Tully-McManus contributed to this report.

Republican leaders on Capitol Hill were already looking at a messy political battle over the looming expiration of billions of dollars in Obamacare subsidies. Then the anti-abortion advocates showed up.

With a possible government shutdown less than a week away, Democrats’ big ask is that Republicans agree to extend the Affordable Care Act subsidies, which were expanded by Congress in 2021 and are set to sunset at the end of the year.

Insurance premiums are likely to skyrocket this fall without an extension, and some Republicans are open to cutting a deal, mindful that a failure to act could have dire consequences in the midterms.

But now prominent anti-abortion groups are wading into the debate, pounding the halls of Congress to make their case that the enhanced tax credits for ACA insurance premiums function as an indirect subsidy for services designed to end pregnancies. The argument could make conservative Republicans who already loathed the policy dig in further against greenlighting an extension.

It’s setting the stage for a major internal GOP power struggle that could pit hard-liners against moderates in more competitive districts, while also complicating the ability of Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune to allow a bipartisan deal to go through.

“It should be a huge factor for every Republican member,” said House Freedom Caucus member Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) of the pushback from anti-abortion groups. “Republicans have never voted for Obamacare, which is why it would be ridiculous for us to extend it.”

The lobbying campaign by anti-abortion advocates is exposing an internal GOP rift over health care that’s become a hallmark of President Donald Trump’s second term and could influence whether Republicans keep control of Washington. Over the summer, a conservative push to peel back Medicaid became a major flashpoint inside the GOP. Now similar camps are gearing up for battle over Obamacare subsidies and abortion, with Trump’s silence on the issue again proving to be a critical wildcard.

Yet Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which mobilizes its large grassroots network to elect anti-abortion candidates, is plowing ahead, most recently making its case during a briefing last week with staffers for members of the conservative House Republican Study Committee.

Representatives from the organization are talking to the relevant congressional committees, lawmaker offices and party leaders “who are most engaged with finding a solution,” according to a spokesperson for the group. Marilyn Musgrave, the organization’s vice president of government affairs and a former Republican congresswoman from Colorado, has been meeting directly with lawmakers.

The in-person lobbying follows a letter to lawmakers in early September from nearly 90 anti-abortion groups, including Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, that called on Congress to “ensure that any extension of ACA subsidies is protected by the Hyde amendment,” adding, “the pro-life Congress must not be a party to the Obama policy of taxpayer funding for abortion.”

The Hyde amendment, named for the late Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), bars the use of federal funds to pay for abortion except in cases of rape or incest or when the mother’s life is at risk.

Democrats argue the ACA already has guardrails to ensure that the law complies with the Hyde amendment. They say the health law requires that insurance plans segregate premiums for abortion and non-abortion services into different accounts.

But opponents of abortion call that firewall a gimmick, arguing the tax credits effectively subsidize plans that cover abortion regardless of how the premiums are divvied up.

In a memo circulated by the office of Sen. Steve Daines this week, the Montana Republican similarly argued that “taxpayer funds are fungible” and that the enhanced credits make it easier for plans to offer abortion services.

“If Senate Democrats do not believe there are meaningful differences between the status quo and the Hyde Amendment, they should have no issues with codifying Hyde into law,” the memo reads.

Autumn Christensen, senior policy advisor at Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said her organization was prepared to punish Republicans who vote for an extension without addressing this perceived discrepancy.

“Republicans have consistently stood against taxpayer-funded abortion in Obamacare, and we are confident they will continue to do so,” she said in a statement. “Extending subsidies without Hyde is a clear vote to expand abortion on demand, and every such vote will be scored by SBA Pro-Life America.”

Christensen and her colleague, federal affairs director Jamie Dangers, also distributed a memo at the Republican Study Committee briefing last week warning that extending the ACA subsidies “would be a betrayal of this summer’s victory” — a nod to Republicans’ sweeping tax and spending law that defunded Planned Parenthood.

Some Republicans are amenable to negotiation. For example, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who has said the credits should be extended before the midterms, suggested this wouldn’t be difficult to address. Cornyn is facing an intense Republican primary against Texas attorney general and Trump ally Ken Paxton.

“The Hyde amendment has been the rule since the mid-’70s or so, and so that will be something important for us to negotiate,” Cornyn said in an interview.

Thune, whose spokesperson did not return a request for comment, has left the door open to a possible deal while arguing that Democrats “created this problem” and should be the ones to initiate a proposal to address the subsidy cliff.

A group of Senate Republicans has been meeting to discuss legislation to extend the credits with new restrictions. Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), one of the members of the working group, said last week that Hyde protections were part of that discussion.

Johnson’s spokesperson also did not respond to a request for comment. But the speaker, who is firmly anti-abortion, has indicated his belief that Congress can easily wait until later this year to address the subsidies.

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), who wants to secure an extension, doesn’t want to delay. He’s facilitating conversations with the leaders of the House Ways and Means Committee and trying to broker a bipartisan compromise with centrists in the Problem Solvers Caucus toward that end.

“I’m worried that there’s not enough focus being paid to it. We’re up against a real deadline. The rates are going to kick in probably Nov. 1, so we have October to get it done,” Fitzpatrick, a co-chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus, said in an interview.

Behind the scenes, however, Johnson’s leadership circle is aware of the dilemma and is increasingly viewing the abortion issue as deeply problematic for the prospects of a deal, according to three Republicans granted anonymity to describe private conversations.

Senior Republicans believe that leaders won’t be able to extend the subsidies without Democratic votes, and Democrats won’t support an extension that puts new restrictions on abortion coverage.

“You’re not going to be able to make progress on lowering Americans’ premiums if you start handing out right-wing trophies,” Sen. Ron Wyden, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a statement. That panel, like Ways and Means, has jurisdiction over the tax credits.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), who authored the legislation that created the enhanced credits, also intimated that bringing abortion into the debate would be a nonstarter for Democrats.

“We have to focus on good-faith solutions that can earn bipartisan support,” she said, adding that she has “always supported full access to women’s reproductive health services.”

Restrictions on abortion access won’t sit well either with all of the dozen House Republicans who have signed onto legislation that would extend the subsidies for one year, no strings attached. Many are moderates facing tough reelection fights next year, and any accolades they earn by extending the subsidies could be offset by the backlash from restricting reproductive health services.

Some of the Republican co-sponsors of the measure — including Fitzpatrick, Rep. Jen Kiggans of Virginia and Mike Lawler of New York — are also among the members who just wrapped up a fight with hard-liners over abortion and health care coverage in the GOP megabill that Trump signed into law in July.

And then there are those Republicans who don’t want any deal, for any reason, viewing the premium tax credits as bad policy regardless of the abortion issue. According to a Congressional Budget Office analysis published earlier this month, extending the credits for 10 years would cost around $350 billion and increase the number of people with health insurance by 3.8 million.

House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) said the subsidies were “fiscally reckless” and “bad policy.”

“I don’t see a way to modify it,” he added. “It’s like putting lipstick on a pig.”

House centrists are discussing the outlines of a possible compromise to extend Affordable Care Act insurance subsidies in hopes of jump-starting stalled talks over the soon-to-expire tax credits that have also emerged as a key fault line in the brewing government shutdown battle.

The bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus has privately broached whether an income cap should be imposed on who can benefit from the subsidies. Several Republicans in the group have floated a $200,000 cap, according to three people granted anonymity to describe the talks.

More than 20 million Americans currently benefit from the enhanced subsidies, which were enacted by Democrats under President Joe Biden in 2021. Some Republicans are now open to extending them, though many are pushing for new curbs to bring down the cost. The income cap is a bare minimum demand for many Republicans.

Democrats, meanwhile, are pushing for a permanent extension as part of government funding talks ahead of the Sept. 30 shutdown deadline. Some centrist Democrats have been willing to discuss concessions, though they are wary of publicly supporting any new limitations at this point.

After a pair of dueling partisan funding bills failed in the Senate last week, members of the Problem Solvers’ executive board discussed Monday how a potential compromise on the insurance subsidies could fit into a bipartisan agreement to address a government shutdown, according to two other people with direct knowledge of the meeting.

Top Republican leaders have ruled out dealing with the ACA subsidies as part of any deal to avert an Oct. 1 shutdown, saying it’s an issue to deal with in November or December.

But Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), co-chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus, pushed back on that timeline in an interview last week.“That can’t happen,” Fitzpatrick said. “We’re up against a real deadline. The rates are going to kick in probably Nov. 1. So we have October to get it done.”

The Problem Solvers group has yet to settle on any restrictions beyond a clean one-year extension bill that is led by Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-Va.) and Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.) and backed by several other members of the caucus.

Beyond the income cap, some more conservative House Republicans have floated other restrictions — such as grandfathering in current beneficiaries but cutting off access for new enrollees, or forcing some enrollees to pay a minimum out-of-pocket premium — according to three other people granted anonymity to describe the conversations. Another section of GOP hardliners want to completely axe the subsidies, providing another wrinkle for GOP leaders to work through as centrists raise concerns about the fallout in their districts.

Fitzpatrick — a member of the Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over the subsidies — confirmed that the income cap and other reforms have come up in private talks with centrist House lawmakers over an extension.House Democrats, meanwhile, generally want a longer extension with fewer limitations on enrollees. Even Democrats in the Problem Solvers Caucus caution they haven’t agreed to anything or seriously discussed the details of an income cap. Any final agreement, they note, will have to be negotiated and blessed by top congressional leaders.

If an extension deal can’t be struck quickly around the shutdown standoff, Fitzpatrick and other worried Republicans are planning to push for passage of a standalone bill in October before insurers start to lock in pricing for 2026.

“A lot of our folks back home are talking about this,” he added. “It’s a big, big deal.”