what is a government shutdown

what is a government shutdown

Understanding Government Shutdowns: Causes, Consequences, and Solutions

1. Introduction to Government Shutdowns

The issue is a challenge for political leaders, career administrators, employee groups, contractors, and the public. In a shutdown, many employees of the federal government are not allowed to work, while some designated to support the legislative and judicial branches and employees responsible for the protection of life and property are exempt and work in those areas, all without pay. The implementation of plans has consequences for employees—the checks that support families who live from paycheck to paycheck don’t come. Furthermore, the procedures and plans for operating in a shutdown environment are not straightforward. Apart from the conceptual and practical challenges, a shutdown postpones existing agency programs supported by discretionary funds and sends ripple effects throughout the United States. Federal employees’ involvement in offices scattered across the nation helps to heighten public awareness of these adverse effects. For example, employees of federal parks and museums, food safety inspectors, and transportation security personnel are placed in nonwork status without pay. Whether they understand or not that the United States Constitution permits these activities to lapse, members of the public are often not inclined to see the poses of their Congressional representatives as legitimate. Shutdowns can have significant adverse political consequences for the President and the members of Congress, some of which can deter future occurrences. With abilities to influence public opinion, the media plays important roles in government funding struggles and shutdowns.

When people go to the polls to elect their leaders, they expect that they will manage the government responsibly. Among their responsibilities are making sure that there are sufficient funds for the government to operate. But there are times when Congress fails to approve funding for the government, which leads to a government shutdown. The absence of funding for federal agencies and personnel when Congress has not honored the normal procedure for approving funding can result in a partial shutdown of a broad array of government operations. Periodic funding gaps are seen as a measure of congressional and presidential failure to act as expected—federal policy as designed by the Constitution is simply not being carried out. No other system of government in the world experiences blocked funding for government functions. Shutdowns raise questions about how the government can fulfill its responsibilities when it lacks funds because funds have not been appropriated and resolve contentious policy disputes.

2. Causes and Triggers of Government Shutdowns

Institutional options are connected both with the budget processes and with the policy-making process in general. At least two institutional options can be distinguished. On the one hand, it is about strengthening the government’s ability to continue to work even in the absence of a regular budget. On the other hand, it is about setting up a budget process that is less prone to deadlock, i.e. that has fewer opportunities for veto players to demand concessions and holds no large uncertainty about the budget making outcome.

Most research on causes and triggers of government shutdowns points toward a combination of political and institutional factors, namely the power structure of the legislature and the majority position on budgetary issues. The efficiency makes a difference between presidential and parliamentary systems. At the same time, careful empirical analyses are rather rare. More evidence-based studies should give a better idea of what makes governments unable to agree on a budget in time and why some countries run into these problems more often than others. Due to the rarity and uniqueness of government shutdowns, such studies are challenging, and large research consortia might be needed to address this important question.

3. Impact and Consequences of Government Shutdowns

A government shutdown affects a large share of the roughly 2 million nonpostal federal employees. One estimate suggests that 75 percent of federal employees are subject to furlough due to a funding gap. Those who are designated as exempt personnel continue to work during a general lapse in appropriations and are not furloughed. Necessary employees are those whose activities are excepted because they are necessary to protect human life and property and are dedicated to those functions. Discretionary employees are those who are necessary for the exercise of the President’s discretionary authority to protect federal property and officers and are engaged in the orderly suspension of most of the department’s functions, regardless of the partial lapse in the department’s appropriations.

Funding gaps and shutdowns cause significant disruption to government operations and have an adverse impact on the economy. The laws that authorize the furloughs of federal employees in the event of a funding gap are very strict, and they must be followed to the letter. Otherwise, the public has the right to sue for damages for violations of the Constitution or other statutes protecting their rights, such as the Antideficiency Act. Disruptions to the way the federal government operates and the delivery of services to the public, as well as federal employees’ paycheck disruptions, often lead to secondary economic consequences – layoffs by government contractors, decreased spending by federal employees, and those affected.

4. Historical Examples and Case Studies

The concept of a “government shutdown” is a relatively recent one, with the first instance occurring in the late 19th century when the Copyright Act expired and some government functions ceased. In the 20th century, a compilation of historical funding gaps in the United States shows that Fiscal Year 1980 had six funding gaps lasting three days or fewer. The next most frequent funding gap years were FY1970 and FY1977, which each had four gaps of 10 days or fewer. In the past 30 years, however, a dramatic uptick occurred. There were nine government shutdowns (ultimately resolved) in the 1980s, and three each in the 1990s, 2000s, and 2010s. The 2018 shutdown, as of the time of publication, is the ninth instance since the Budget process reforms in 1976. The 2013 government shutdown was the first since 1996 to result in a media-around-the-world closure of U.S. national parks and monuments to the public. A significant number of national parks and landmarks were completely closed to the public, creating enormous public relations problems for Congress.

Historical examples and case studies. U.S. government shutdowns are relatively rare and brief occurrences, making them difficult to study from a social science perspective. Concern about economic and political consequences also constrains empirical study. Robust data on government services provided during funding gaps are also limited, often because shutdown conditions lead to temporary data shutdowns or lack of service provision. However, prior to achieving contemporary status as a potential “government crisis,” a number of government shutdowns took place in the 20th century.

5. Strategies and Solutions to Prevent Future Government Shutdowns

4. Holding a Penalty Auction.

3. Legal contracts between separate political interests.

2. Ex-ante Budget Forecasts.

Should creating a more rigid spending fence be the sole means for ending the prospect of future budget impasses? Should Congress also prohibit or discourage the practice by which presents are attached to applicable appropriation legislation? Both of these are worthy options and may deserve further serious consideration and analysis.

1. Strengthen the “fence” and “the fog” and eliminate unconnected “riders”. Creating a meaningful economic incentive for Congress and the President to reach agreement on appropriation legislation is a necessary precondition to preventing further government shutdowns. More simply put, the status quo legislative spending process does not create a sufficiently meaningful “fence” beyond which appropriation legislation must be enacted before funding expires. Why? Given today’s baseline budgetary legislation that perennially renews entitlement program outlays, the consequences of failing to renew or “disappearing” discretionary, unattached appropriations are neither immediate nor large enough to generate a meaningful sense of urgency among Congress and the President before government closing. The absence of meaningful spending incentives is the “fog” that provides Congress and the President with the comfort and security that they can engage in non-cooperative brinkmanship.

Given the potential adverse implications of government shutdowns on the United States and global economies, what can be done to prevent future shutdown episodes from occurring in the future? There are several strategies for addressing and potentially solving the frequent budget impasses that lead to shutdowns. Here, we discuss a variety of different strategies and highlight their potential implications.