Congress entered a decisive week in which tactical choices made by rival factions could determine whether the federal government shutters on Sept. 30. Lawmakers described a narrowing set of options — a clean continuing resolution (CR), a short-term CR that buys more negotiation time, or a series of targeted funding bills — but deep intra-party divisions, particularly among House Republicans, mean none commands an easy path to passage.

On the right flank of the Republican conference, conservative hardliners are insisting on spending cuts and policy concessions in exchange for votes, arguing that a must-pass CR is an opportunity to constrain domestic programs and attach immigration or border-enforcement measures. “We won’t fund business as usual,” said a senior member of the right-leaning caucus, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal strategy. That group’s demands complicate Republican leaders’ preference for either a clean CR or a short-term measure that preserves leverage without triggering a confrontation.

Moderate Republicans and the Senate Republican leadership are urging a different tack: avoid a shutdown and take fiscal fights to the appropriations process where compromise is more likely. Senate negotiators, who would face the filibuster threshold, are signaling readiness to approve a bipartisan short-term CR if House leaders can deliver a bill without controversial riders. “We need to keep the government open and work these issues in regular order,” a Senate Republican aide said.

Democrats are unified in opposing policy riders that would strip funding for programs or curtail aid to U.S. partners. They are also leveraging public opinion, pointing out the potential impact on social services, health programs and international assistance. A senior House Democratic leader warned that any CR containing politically charged riders could imperil support in the Senate and prompt a presidential veto. The White House has echoed that stance, with a spokesman reiterating that the administration will brook no cuts to core domestic priorities or to commitments for allies.

The stakes extend beyond Washington. European and Asian capitals are watching congressional maneuvering closely because U.S. funding decisions in the coming weeks will affect military and humanitarian support for partners in Ukraine, Israel and elsewhere. Financial markets, which already price in political risk, could react to signs of prolonged dysfunction: investors pay attention to shutdown risk as a potential drag on growth and a test of U.S. fiscal reliability.

Procedurally, the House must pass any funding vehicle and send it to the Senate, where 60 votes will be needed to overcome a filibuster for most measures. That arithmetic gives moderates and bipartisan senators outsized leverage, even as the House’s intraparty fractures create bargaining leverage for smaller blocs.

Analysts expect lawmakers to pursue a short-term CR to push final negotiations into the autumn, but they caution that such a temporary fix would only postpone the confrontation. “A stopgap would be the path of least resistance, but it’s not a solution,” said a budget expert. “The political calculus — who blinks and when — will determine whether Congress walks back from the brink or allows a shutdown that would harm domestic programs and send a signal of instability abroad.”

As the calendar narrows, Washington’s negotiators face a decision point that will test not just legislative skill but the capacity of rival factions to balance partisan aims with the practical costs of a government shutdown.