when was the last government shutdown

when was the last government shutdown

The Impact and Implications of Government Shutdowns in the United States

1. Introduction to Government Shutdowns

In a shutdown, significant portions of the federal workforce are furloughed, and most of the work of the government is suspended. Only those employees and offices that perform emergency work are exempt from the furlough. There are four major types of scenarios leading to a shutdown. First, the Congress may not pass a funding bill or a Continuing Resolution. If the President vetoes the bill or resolution, or if the Congress and the President cannot reconcile their legislative differences, a shutdown could occur. Second, the Congress may choose to nix a funding line item by using its defunding authority. Third, the Congress may also pass appropriation bills with specific starting dates. If a funding bill does not have a starting date, the program office will not be able to obligate funds from the Treasury when the new fiscal year starts. Finally, the Congress may attach policy riders to legislation to “poke” the President or Administration.

A government shutdown occurs when a government discontinues providing non-essential services. Typically, federal services that continue despite a shutdown are those that are essential to the health and safety of citizens, such as the armed forces. A government shutdown is a situation in which the 12 regular appropriation bills, as well as any supplemental appropriation bills for a fiscal year, have not been enacted into law. With no regular appropriations in place at the start of the new fiscal year, or another law providing for funding, many functions of the federal government are then dependent on the enactment of a series of stopgap or temporary continuing resolutions.

2. Historical Overview of Government Shutdowns

From the Articles of Confederation in 1789 through 1870, federal funding occurred through an as-needed basis that was primarily limited. However, 11 appropriation lapses occurred in the 38 years following 1789, an average of one every 3.5 years. With the enactment of the General Appropriations Act and the introduction of the permanent committee system in 1870, the United States truly entered the “modern era” of appropriations. Since that time, 18 funding gaps have taken place, an average of one every 4.7 years. Wildlife Refuges and the National Mall are obvious sites of government shutdowns. However, the impact resides further afield. National environmental impact reviews and permitting and licensing processes can be placed on hold. The approval of small business loans is also halted. In addition, the publication of economic statistics and census information can be delayed.

The idea of a government shutdown – essential government services and nearly all civilian federal employees are furloughed due to a lack of an enacted appropriation – is a uniquely United States phenomenon. Since 1980, there have been 20 such interruptions, ranging from one day to 21 days in length. The number of federal employees impacted has varied from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands. Clearly, a government shutdown – be it days, weeks or months in length – represents a significant national event.

3. Causes and Consequences of Government Shutdowns

As of the writing of this book chapter, the U.S. federal government had endured 22 shutdowns since 1981. Among that set, an impressive nine occurred from the start of fiscal year (FY) 1990 through the end of FY 1996. Notably, twenty such costly budget impasses took place over a seemingly concentrated 35-year period, though several were relatively brief (i.e., hours or days rather than weeks, in contrast to the record-setting 35-day shutdown that began at midnight on December 22, 2018). Given their apparent impact, the apparent pain and suffering that they inflict on not only the federal workforce but also on millions of Americans and the overall U.S. economy, it would not be surprising to observe a sudden surge of government shutdown research. After all, how can such prolonged budget impasses happen in a country that is a paragon of democracy if it isn’t a failure of presidential leadership or of a more properly-functioning system of constitutional democracy?

4. Public Opinion and Political Ramifications

Skocpol collected a diversity of opinion on public opinion data and attitudes toward government. However, since the more recent shutdowns, especially the longer ones, the turn to the point they have remaining a constant fear and source of political confrontation, press accounts, and public opinion polling data would seem to suggest that the public has grown increasingly impatient and dissatisfied with the way these shutdowns influence their daily lives and the services and programs they feel entitled to receive. As a consequence, public trust and confidence in the government have waned, and politicians have become a serious source of public disrespect, ridicule, and even scorn. One curious facet of these shutdowns is that while so much of the spending authorized by the government contributes to regional income, employment, and overall economic growth, so many of the constituencies that are involved in the shutdowns continue to re-elect officials who make decisions that they personally find to be odious. Clearly, the negative feedback effects appear to be less compelling than the negative political consequences and longer economic term that economists and others have so vigorously pointed to.

Public opinion plays an important role in these shutdowns in that it represents the views of citizens, voters, and taxpayers who ultimately elect the officials making these decisions. Voters by a two-to-one margin believe that it’s better for the government to shut down temporarily than to increase spending. It’s unclear where the public thinks policymakers should cut, but it does seem that they believe it can be done. However, continued government shutdowns can also have negative political repercussions as public opinion polls suggest that many people have held Congress responsible for the shutdowns after a while as they come to be seen as obstinate, unwilling to compromise, and unable to operate in a civilized, constructive manner that serves the country’s best interest.

5. Lessons Learned and Recommendations for Avoiding Future Shutdowns

If current events, past experiences, and simulations of budget decision making are keys to understanding the harms and likelihood of government shutdowns, stakeholders should advocate measures aiming at reducing or eliminating problems suggested by those approaches. In reviewing our proposals, however, we would like to stress that efforts to avoid a shutdown are not costless. Indeed, attempts to avoid a shutdown can affect bargaining and compromise, the quality of budgets, and the efficiencies associated with successful passage of appropriations bills. The question, therefore, is how much is it worth, and when? Our examination suggests a number of changes and it is clear that trade-offs among them must be considered. Indeed, it is likely that we do not yet know what all the trade-offs are. Under those circumstances, the best policy choice needs to rely on (oftentimes informed) judgment. There is no magic bullet. However, some options do rank higher than others.

In order to avoid flawed budget processes, unplanned spending cuts, and costly disruptions of government operations, we conclude that it is important to understand better how current processes often lead to conflicts and avoid defining institutional problems too narrowly. Instead, stakeholders should gain a better appreciation for how various amendments might alter the tasks and incentives of relevant participants – the President, appropriators, budget actors, and Members. In other words, the goal should be to reform the Senate so that time is on the side of those who seek deliberate, rational consideration of legislative issues. It would be a mistake, however, to think that conflicts being resolved sooner assures that the results of the process would be more desirable or that the prospect of shutdown will be avoided altogether. Indeed, there are reasons to believe that a one-day or one-week extension of the drop dead date may make government shutdowns more likely.