Friday evening’s weekly news roundup featuring PBS News Hour host William Brangham, New York Times columnist David Brooks, and MSNBC host Jonathan Capehart was full of bizarre government shutdown-related hot takes. In addition to Obamacare subsidies, Brangham and Capehart added rescission packages to the list of Democratic demands, which they falsely claimed take away Congress’s spending power. Meanwhile, Brooks lamented that by shutting down the government, Democrats are forcing themselves to talk about something other than supposed threats to democracy.
Before getting to rescissions, Capehart managed to get in the usual talking points about subsidies, “I have always believed that tomorrow, November 1, was one of the dates that that the Democrats were looking at. That's the date when people start getting the — open enrollment starts and they start to find out how much their premiums are going to cost. This is what Democrats have been talking about for a few months now and why they won't provide the votes.”
After also musing about how Tuesday’s elections might force some movement, Capehart arrived at rescission packages, “But the other thing that's hanging out there that people forget, it's not just the subsidies that Democrats have a problem with. It is also that the whole thing of rescissions and that they could come to some — any kind of agreement.”
Brangham interrupted to add, “This is the Trump administration saying — basically taking Congress's spending authority away saying, ‘I know you appropriated this money. It's coming back.’”
Capehart concurred, “Right, exactly. ‘We don't care what you decided, what you authorize. We will do — we will spend the money the way we want to spend it, or we won't spend it at all.’ And so if you're a Democrat and you are a part of some gang, I don't know if they still do gangs like they used to in the past, but even if they provide the votes and they come to some agreement, the president and Russell Vought, the OMB director, could just step out there and say, we don't care what you think.”
Fact-check: rescission packages, such as the one that defunded PBS, have to be approved by Congress.
Eventually, Brangham turned to Brooks and wondered, “David, do you think that the Democrats are making a coherent, resonant argument as to why they are holding the line here?”
Brooks wasn’t enthusiastic, “I think it's okay. I mean, they're emphasizing the subsidies. Frankly, if it was up to me. I might have mentioned a once-in-a-nation's-history threat to democracy as the core problem here. But they're making coherent case on the health subsidies. I think it's not the legitimate case that should be made at this moment in American history.”
Brangham then asked a nonsensical question, “Do you think if they had pivoted, though, to that argument to say, we will not fund what they argue is an unlawful administration, that that would be more resonant?”
What would that even look like? A temper tantrum for the sake of a having a temper tantrum? For his part, Brooks also wasn’t so sure, “I don't know. Clearly, their pollsters said nobody cares about democracy, because they would be making that case. The pollsters said, ‘we're good on health care.’”
Brooks then spent several words predicting the shutdown is almost over because the last time air traffic controllers started skipping work provided the motivation to end the 2018 shutdown. He also repeated early criticism of Democrats for shutting down the government, but echoed his point that it merely distracts from other, more important matters, “I'm upset that not everybody's upset. Like, so — our democracy is deteriorating to such a degree, there should be howling outrage that, why are you shutting down the government? Why are we hurting SNAP moms, food stamps, the poorest people among us? And there should be more outrage about that.”
Maybe if Brooks would’ve spent his time talking about that instead of prophesying doom over the state of democracy, there would be.
Here is a transcript for the October 31 show:
PBS News Hour
10/31/2025
7:33 PM ET
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Do you think this ruling, these rulings, takes any pressure off of them to — and then maybe the shutdown does come to an end?
JONATHAN CAPEHART: I don't think these rulings take any pressure off Democrats, for two reasons. One, I have always believed that tomorrow, November 1, was one of the dates that that the Democrats were looking at. That's the date when people start getting the — open enrollment starts and they start to find out how much their premiums are going to cost.
This is what Democrats have been talking about for a few months now and why they won't provide the votes.
BRANGHAM: These are the subsidies for Obamacare that will now go through the roof.
CAPEHART: Right. Right. And so that's why they're not providing the votes for — to reopen the government.
The other thing, the other date that we should pay attention to is the elections on Tuesday. These will be, whether we like it or not, bellwether. And I suspect that, depending on the outcome on Tuesday, we could see some shifting, people getting together, talking and coming to some resolution over the shutdown.
But the other thing that's hanging out there that people forget, it's not just the subsidies that Democrats have a problem with. It is also that the whole thing of rescissions and that they could come to some — any kind of agreement.
BRANGHAM: This is the Trump administration saying — basically taking Congress's spending authority away—
CAPEHART: Right.
BRANGHAM: — saying, “I know you appropriated this money. It's coming back.”
CAPEHART: Right, exactly. “We don't care what you decided, what you authorize. We will do — we will spend the money the way we want to spend it, or we won't spend it at all.”
And so if you're a Democrat and you are a part of some gang, I don't know if they still do gangs like they used to in the past, but even if they provide the votes and they come to some agreement, the president and Russell Vought, the OMB director, could just step out there and say, we don't care what you think.
So I don't think — all the way back to your original part of the question, I do not think the two judges, their ruling takes any pressure off Democrats. If anything, as we get beyond tomorrow and certainly beyond the elections on Tuesday, I think pressure could grow on Republicans, the Republican leaders, particularly Senator Thune, Majority Leader Thune, to come up — let's come up with something so we can get the government reopened.
BRANGHAM: David, do you think that the Democrats are making a coherent, resonant argument as to why they are holding the line here?
DAVID BROOKS: I think it's okay. I mean, they're emphasizing the subsidies. Frankly, if it was up to me. I might have mentioned a once-in-a-nation's-history threat to democracy as the core problem here.
But they're making coherent case on the health subsidies. I think it's not the legitimate case that should be made at this moment in American history.
BRANGHAM: Do you think if they had pivoted, though, to that argument to say, we will not fund what they argue is an unlawful administration, that that would be more resonant?
BROOKS: I don't know. Clearly, their pollsters said nobody cares about democracy, because they would be making that case. The pollsters said, “we're good on health care.”
And if you look at the issue list, which party do you trust on which issue, Republicans tend to have advantage to almost every issue except for health care. So they picked the one issue. You know, I think we're at the glide path down toward a government reopening.
And I say that because last time this happened at this length in 2018, it's when the air traffic controllers began to not show up at work.
BRANGHAM: Right.
BROOKS: It's — when the benefits began to really get cut and people began to feel it, then they reopened the government. And I don't know which way they will go, like, who — how they will cut some sort of deal. But you got SNAP. You got the — as we saw earlier, the Head Start.
There's just a lot of things where people are really beginning to feel it. And so I think they will begin. I just — before, if — hopefully the next time we meet, though, the government will be open. But we should not be running government by shutdown. You should go to the voters. If you want a policy change, go to the voters. Don't shut down the government.
And, frankly, somebody should ask the Democrats, why did you schedule the subsidies to expire a year before an election? Why didn't you just make the subsidies forever?
BRANGHAM: Right.
BROOKS: And the reason they didn't want to do that is because they wanted to hide the cost, because what the Democrats are proposing would increase the national debt by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years.
But we should — I'm upset that not everybody's upset. Like, so — our democracy is deteriorating to such a degree, there should be howling outrage that, why are you shutting down the government? Why are we hurting SNAP moms, food stamps, the poorest people among us? And there should be more outrage about that.
