I serve as Chief Advocacy Officer of the Defense Credit Union Council (DCUC), representing credit unions that support service members, veterans, and their families. I spend my days working with institutions that do something Washington too often fails to do during budget crises: they plan ahead, meet obligations, and keep faith with the people who depend on them.

That is why the current standoff over funding for the Department of Homeland Security should alarm every American who cares about national security, maritime commerce, and basic fairness. When Congress allows DHS funding to drift from deadline to deadline, the U.S. Coast Guard—the military service inside DHS—becomes uniquely exposed to disruption.

We have seen this movie in FY2026 already. According to the Congressional Research Service, the fiscal year began with a 42-day funding gap from Oct. 1 to Nov. 11, 2025, until Congress enacted a continuing resolution.  And today—on Feb. 10, 2026—DHS is again operating under a short extension that expires Feb. 13, because lawmakers carved DHS out of a broader appropriations deal and left it for later.

“Later” is not a strategy for a service that runs toward storms, interdictions, and distress calls. During a funding lapse, the Coast Guard generally continues operations necessary for the safety of human life, protection of property, and national security. That includes urgent contingencies like hurricane response and the maritime border mission.  The mission does not stop. The paperwork and pay can.

This is not an abstract budget-process complaint. Congress itself has recognized the structural problem: bills like the Pay Our Coast Guard Parity Act are built around “Coast Guard-specific funding lapses”, the exact scenario where DoW is funded but the Coast Guard isn’t, simply because its pay flows through DHS.  That is how a Coast Guard member can be ordered to stand watch while Washington argues about an entirely different part of DHS.

In my world, we see the downstream consequences quickly. During shutdown threats and lapses, credit unions become “first financial responders,” offering 0% emergency loans, paycheck advances, skip-a-pay options, and fee waivers so military households can cover rent, groceries, and childcare until Washington “gets its act together.”  I’m proud of that. But I’m also tired of pretending it’s a sustainable model for national security. As I wrote in a DCUC letter supporting Coast Guard pay protections: “No family serving our nation should ever have to rely on emergency loans… simply to survive a government shutdown.”

Story continued below…

Even when back pay is expected, the near-term stress is real. The Coast Guard’s own shutdown guidance explains that excepted personnel keep working, furloughed personnel stop, and pay timing becomes uncertain—while bills remain due.  In a separate DCUC letter on shutdown-related credit harm, I warned that “No American’s credit report should be scarred because Congress fails to do its job.”  The financial hit doesn’t end when a vote finally happens.

Meanwhile, the Coast Guard’s readiness needs have not been sidelined. The Coast Guard’s FY2026 Congressional Justification requests $14.49B, including $1.74B for Procurement, Construction, and Improvements, funding that supports cutter and aircraft recapitalization and sustainment.  If Congress wants a modern, capable Coast Guard in an era of maritime threats, it cannot govern the service on fiscal “autopilot.”

Independent oversight shows why this urgency matters. GAO reports rising equipment failures and decreasing cutter availability, and found the Coast Guard deferred $179 million in cutter maintenance in FY2024 (inflation-adjusted).  GAO also describes cutters losing operational availability and missing patrol obligations due to unplanned maintenance.  Those are public-safety consequences—not accounting disputes.

The Arctic and polar fleet picture is just as sobering. GAO notes cost growth and schedule risk on Polar Security Cutters, citing an estimate that the first three PSCs may cost up to $5.1B, about 60% more than prior estimates.  A service trying to manage that level of complexity cannot also be forced to manage recurring appropriations brinkmanship.

So what should Congress do—right now?

First, pass full-year DHS appropriations before Feb. 13. Stop governing the Coast Guard by short-term extensions and political leverage. Our ports, waterways, and coastal communities deserve better than another round of “will they, won’t they” budgeting.

Second, enact permanent pay protections, so that even if Congress fails again, Coast Guard members aren’t punished for DHS’s placement in the appropriations structure. The Senate Commerce Committee has put it plainly: because the Coast Guard sits in DHS, it can be left out of DoW-focused stopgaps, and bipartisan bills exist to correct that inequity.

This is a nonpartisan test of seriousness. The Coast Guard’s motto is “Semper Paratus”—Always Ready. Congress should show the same readiness by funding DHS reliably and removing Coast Guard pay from the chaos of shutdown politics.