This week, more than two months before the end of the fiscal year, the House of Representatives passed a Continuing Resolution (CR), largely along party lines, to fund the federal government at FY2026 levels through December 4.

Let’s be clear. Government shutdowns are wasteful and accomplish nothing. But on the other hand, it’s a dereliction of duty for Congress to abandon regular appropriations while there are still more than two months left in the fiscal year. Congress still has time to fund at least part of the government by passing some or all of the twelve regular spending bills.

House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-OK) described the House-passed bill as a “clean” CR, because it does not include explicit partisan poison pills that would warrant Democratic opposition. But even a “clean” rubber-stamp of the 2026 spending bills would lock agencies into last year’s priorities for the remainder of the year.

On the other side of the Capitol, the Senate has different plans. Earlier this week, the White House sent Congress a list of “anomalies,” or exceptions that allow funding levels or authorities to differ from last year’s appropriations in specified areas. Some anomalies are merely technical, such as cutting obsolete language regarding this year’s 250th anniversary celebration. Others are more consequential, providing additional funding or new authorities that go well beyond simply extending current operations. The President’s requested anomalies were not included in the House-passed bill, but Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) has said he wants to incorporate them into a bipartisan Senate version. Thune also suggested that, if Democrats don’t get on board, Republicans would try to pass the CR through budget reconciliation.

That brings us to the White House’s list of anomalies, some of which appear to be unnecessary and others controversial.

For starters, there are billions of dollars in anomalies for the Pentagon. While Pentagon anomalies are not uncommon in CRs, several of these requests would make significant policy or spending changes rather than simply keeping the government operating.

Exhibit A: $1 billion for the Trump-class battleship. In addition to funding a wasteful weapons system, the request would begin production before the ship has even been fully designed. Did we not learn anything from the F-35?

Exhibit B: Language exempting unobligated Pentagon funds enacted under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) from sequestration, which would otherwise require the Pentagon to forfeit 8 percent of any unobligated funds remaining at the end of the fiscal year. As of July 2, the Pentagon still had $89 billion in unobligated OBBBA funding and is separately asking for $73 billion in additional funding for the Iran war.

Exhibit C: $3.2 billion for Defense-Wide Procurement “for operations necessary to support National Security Systems.” The request states that, “Without the anomaly, DOW would not be able to acquire equipment in support of an Administration priority that is critical to national security. Additional information is available at a higher classification.” Remember, the Pentagon would still be funded at an annualized rate of more than $900 billion for the few months covered by the CR covers. If this request is truly critical to national security, the administration should make that case to Congress. Otherwise, it can wait for the full Pentagon spending bill.

Under so-called regular order, Congress would pass all twelve appropriations bills on time and on a bipartisan basis every year. But regular is anything but regular. Congress has completed all twelve bills before the start of the fiscal year only four times in the last 50 years. So, while passing a regular budget on time doesn’t seem likely, Congress should still try to enact as many appropriations bills as possible. There are still two full months left in the fiscal year.

If that proves impossible, a continuing resolution to prevent a government shutdown is appropriate. But a CR should do just that—keep the government operating while Congress finishes its work. If congressional leadership instead abandons their constitutional duty to fund the government in favor of an expansive stopgap bill loaded with controversial anomalies, they will make bipartisan agreement far more difficult. And that very well could lead to the very government shutdown they claim to be trying to avoid.