The Coming Government Shutdown
Why it's inevitable and what it means.
POLITICO congressional reporter Daniella Diaz details “Why a shutdown is looking inevitable.” The long version is a rundown of scenarios for avoiding a shutdown and why they’re all incredibly unlikely:
— The Senate jams the House. The first part of this plan is straightforward enough: The Senate has already taken lopsided procedural votes to advance a clean-ish 45-day continuing resolution. The House could take that stopgap and pass it into law on a similarly overwhelming bipartisan vote, avoiding a shutdown. Easy peasy.
Why it’s not happening: For starters, there’s no time. Because there isn’t unanimous consent to speed up the timeline in the Senate, as Burgess laid out, the earliest the CR could pass the chamber is Sunday — after the shutdown is already underway. As for the House, Speaker Kevin McCarthy has promised his conference’s right flank he won’t put a clean CR on the floor in any case, lest he put his gavel at risk.
— The House jams the Senate. In the reverse scenario, the House manages to go first — sending a conservative 30-day, GOP-only CR over to the Senate. Rather than risk being seen as responsible for a shutdown, Senate Democrats capitulate and agree to fast-track the Halloween punt.
Why it’s not happening: Where even to begin. McCarthy has found it thus far impossible to unite his conference behind a CR of any length, and his latest plan — to advance a conservative stopgap tomorrow — is in serious jeopardy after the House Freedom Caucus threatened today to vote against it absent a broader appropriations plan. The Senate, meanwhile, is showing zero indications they’re buying what the House would be selling — across-the-board spending cuts, zeroed-out Ukraine aid and major border policy changes.
— The House GOP moderates revolt. We’ve toyed with this scenario several times in Huddle this week, where centrist Republicans join with Democrats to hijack the House floor and pass a clean CR using rarely used procedural feints, such as a discharge petition or defeating the previous question. That would get around McCarthy’s reluctance to put a bipartisan stopgap on the floor.
Why it’s not happening: There’s not near enough pressure right now to compel the moderates, even those in the toughest districts, to break ranks with McCarthy. As we noted yesterday, lawmakers on both sides say these deals are made under major duress — and that likely means being in a shutdown not three days away from a shutdown.
— The Senate dealmakers go to work. There have been real bipartisan they-said-it-couldn’t-be-done moments in Congress in recent memory, from an infrastructure deal to a gun control bill. All have been the work of cross-aisle Senate gangs, and one appears to be coming together now to discuss a potential deal on border funding — meeting, in fact, as this edition of Huddle hits your inbox.
Why it’s not happening: For one, there are real doubts over how a border deal would be greeted by House Republicans, who want much more than a few billion dollars, and Senate Democrats, who have been pushing for a clean stopgap. For another, the clock is ticking, and this gang knows it: We overheard four of those involved — Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), Todd Young (R-Ind.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas) — discussing on the Senate floor what they’ll need to do if they manage to get a deal. Getting it attached to the pending CR will require unanimous consent, which means starting to talk to more conservative senators.
The short version, as I’ve detailed several times lately, is that roughly 7 House Republicans simply won’t go along with any sane deal and are credibly threatening to oust the Speaker if he makes a deal with the Democrats. The rest of the House GOP Caucus—including quite of few that I would characterize as part of the MAGA wing—think it’s nuts. Ditto Senate Republicans—again, including some MAGA types.
As a technical matter, the “shutdown” happens at midnight tomorrow, although it won’t impact most federal workers until Monday morning since the vast number of us are off Sundays. The uniformed military and other exempt workers will continue to work without pay for the duration. The rest of us will not work without pay for the duration (or until appropriations for our part of the government are passed).
All of us, whether we worked or not, will eventually get paid. Those of us who aren’t living paycheck to paycheck essentially get a free vacation, albeit not a particularly relaxing one. Those who are working will naturally resent that fact. And, of course, a fair number of those impacted don’t have a month’s salary in reserve and will be under significant financial stress. (That’s somewhat mitigated in the National Capitol Region, as banks, utility companies, and the like are habituated to these events and tend to be understanding.)
In the olden days, when Congress failed to pass a budget, government employees just continued to go to work, figuring that it would all be worked out in a matter of days. At the tail end of the Carter administration, though, the Attorney General ruled that the Antideficiency Act of 1884 prohibited federal agencies from spending money Congress hadn’t appropriated and that it would be a federal crime for workers to show up! There have been fourteen shutdowns since, including eight during the Reagan administration, one under George HW Bush, two under Clinton, one under Obama, and one under Trump. Most of them lasted five days or fewer. The exceptions were a 21-day shutdown starting December 15, 1995; a 16-day shutdown starting September 30, 2013; and a 34-day shutdown starting December 21, 2018.
Of course, the shutdowns themselves aren’t the whole story. There have been three since I started my current job ten years and a month ago. (Although only the first, the 2013 shutdown that began a month into my tenure, actually impacted me directly—and that was only because of a mistaken interpretation of the law. In all three cases, the Defense appropriation had already been passed but it took a week to clarify that civilians were covered the first time.) But, because funding is often passed at the last minute—and the can even more often gets kicked down the road in the form of short-term continuing resolutions—we’ve had to plan for shutdowns perhaps two dozen times. It’s an incredible waste of time and resources.
Oh, as another POLITICO report (“It’s not just a shutdown — Congress has no plan for the FAA either“) notes, there’s a new wrinkle this time:
It’s not just a broader government shutdown. By Sunday, the aviation system could also have almost all of its funding cut off if Congress can’t stop squabbling.
And House Republicans don’t seem to have a plan to avoid that, either.
It’s a crucial moment for the Federal Aviation Administration, which is faced with a possible lapse in its statutory authorization for the first time since 2011, as well as a possible gap in funding if the entire federal government shuts down this weekend. The funding cliff comes as the powerful agency has been without a Senate-confirmed leader since April 2022, at a time when near-misses have spiked and air travel has surged.
If Congress can’t act to head off a shutdown and FAA lapse by Sunday, most air traffic controllers will continue working without pay, but some 2,600 controllers in training — including 1,000 that are already working in FAA centers nationwide — will be forced to go home, putting significant strain on an already stressed system. Grant money for important safety improvements will stop and some regulations in process, such as ones intended to shore up passenger protections, will grind to a halt. And the country’s aviation system will lose an estimated $54 million a day in fuel and fare tax revenues.
“At this point, there isn’t a specific plan for [FAA], because there’s so many areas that are important that need to be extended as well,” Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.), a senior member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said in an interview.
Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) said discussions about passing any standalone bills in the House, such as one that would extend the FAA’s expiring authorities, are “frozen.” Donalds insisted that the Senate should abandon its attempt to pass a short-term government funding bill.
“What the Senate should be doing is passing our FAA bill, not stripping it to pass a [continuing resolution] that’s dead here in the House,” Donalds said. “If you had that good faith, even with the Senate, you could figure out a single-issue situation dealing with air traffic control and FAA.”
There is bipartisan support in both chambers for sparing the FAA the brunt of a lapse. But how to get that result while also threading the needle of the fractious House Republican conference, portions of which are spoiling for a shutdown, has remained elusive. Meanwhile, the FAA is estimating that travel will reach its peak for the year heading into Indigenous People’s Day weekend, which will begin in a week.
Given bipartisan support, what’s the problem?
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), a vocal critic of McCarthy who has vowed not to vote for any short-term spending bills, said he supports voting on standalone authorization bills like the FAA but that the crush of looming deadlines is designed to get members to fall in line.
“The fact that we’re backed up against shutdown politics is not a bug of the system, it’s a feature of the system,” Gaetz said. “The leadership does this on purpose so they centralize power and the lobbyists and special interests that make the biggest donations get the biggest say in the policy we’re working on.”
Yup. The crazies think this is all fun and games.
Oh what fun! Flying out next Friday to a wedding. What could go wrong!
Reduced to its more stupid elements, this really is about Kevin McCarthy’s speakership and his refusal to lead and do the right thing for the country. All he has to do is say eff-it, refuse to give in to legislative terrorism, and let the chips fall.
The FAA does a variety of things, like issue rocket launch licenses. SpaceX is currently waiting for the license for the second launch of Starship. Is issuing launch licenses essential? Would the lapse of statutory authority mean that SpaceX could launch without a license?
Since my agency is one of the very few government agencies that raises its own funding, we’re going to just keep trundling on until told otherwise. Gov’t shutdowns present us less difficulty than when our internal database goes on the blink for 3 days.(which has also happened)
@Scott:
Exactly. What should happen as part of the deal is that in exchange for a clean bill, a handful of Democrats vote to keep McCarthy as Speaker, neutering the threat from the nihilists.
We leave for a trip tomorrow and are supposed to return next Sunday. I wasn’t worrying about the shutdown (until now!) because the FAA usually isn’t affected…
Shutdown means I sit on the couch, resisting the lure of EBay. I always counsel my junior minions to max out TSP (to the extent that they can afford) while trying to sock money away for rainy days. End of the FY always constitutes high likelihood of rainy day(s), due to Congressional f*ckery.
I like Moosebreath’s idea. Jeffries needs to give McCarthy a call and dangle this carrot. I’d give McCarthy points for cold-blooded self-interest if he agreed to it.
@Scott:
But, if McCarthy isn’t Speaker, we head back to the vote-o-rama an I am not sure who can command a majority to take the position and without a Speaker, there will be no solution to the spending bill.
I am no fan of McCarthy, but him keeping his job at this moment may be the the only way to even find a solution.
@Steven L. Taylor: That’s where I am. Like democracy, McCarthy is the worst possible Speaker except for all of the other available options.
Yesterday Political Wire did a story speculating that Gaetz is doing this because he’s pissed about not being supported when he was investigated for underage sex. (Investigation dropped = unproven =/= innocent.) I don’t know that I believe it. I suspect it has more to do with his R+19 district which supports cray cray. “If the federal government vanished today, would you miss it? I wouldn’t. Not one bit.” – actual comment at FOX. But it underlines that this is the Seinfeld shutdown. Nobody even knows what it’s about.
As Steven notes in his comments on Diane Feinstein’s passing, I wonder how the temporary shift in power at the Senate will impact this situation.
@Long Time Listener:
That does seem the best way out. But I see McCarthy’s district is R+16. If he does a deal with Jeffries, McCarthy’s going to, like Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, and Mitt Romney, be primaried into the dustbin of Republicans who did the right thing.
Little Kevin’s in a cleft stick. One he worked very hard to put himself in.
@gVOR10:
It’s about the shutdown.
@Moosebreath:
Agreed. The Democrats won’t get to vote for a Speaker of their choice, until they take back the House. In the meantime, it makes better sense no to play the arsonists’ game.
Of course, Jeffries et al might think the shutdown hands the election to Biden and the House to the Democrats. It might, if it’s seen as entirely the GQP’s doing. But it’s also putting party above country.
@Moosebreath:
Somewhere today I was reading that the Dems will demand rules changes and power sharing in exchange, because McCarthy’s word is worth sh*t after he reneged on the last deal.
Think about that. A Speaker of the House whose word is regarded by every House member as worthless. Never in my lifetime…
@Grumpy realist:
SCOTUS is hearing a case, CFPB v. CFSA, this term about whether independent funding is constitutional or if all government spending must be the result of annual appropriations
@gVOR10:
Now there’s a level of idiocy so immense it’s almost impressive. Like, they are so completely ignorant of what the government does that they think if we devolved into Somalia, it wouldn’t affect them at all.
@Mikey: Somalia is exactly where I tell those idiots to move to.
eta all the guns you could ever want as a bonus too!
This is one of the reasons I’m glad to have left federal government service.
So I sympathize greatly with your position, as well as the thousands of others in federal service who have to deal with this BS.
If the FAA statutory authority is suspended, does that mean I can start flying commercial operations without a license?
“ptfe Temporairways – We slip to land every time!”
@Mikey:
Indeed. Somalia is the only modern case I know of actual libertarian governance. Although I understand they’ve recovered some since.
Not quite true. For many employees, it takes a lot of “orderly shutdown” prep to avoid facing much worse problems and headaches whenever it is that Congress finishes its collective autoproctoscopy. In fact, they should have started a couple of days ago, but nobody is ever willing to bet on idiocy (lest they be criticized for wasting hours on something that turned out to be unnecessary).
From a flier published by Veterans Affairs today:
Services to veterans impacted by a shutdown:
• VA will not provide Veteran career counseling or transition assistance program activities.
• The GI Bill Hotline will be closed.
• VA benefits regional offices will be closed.
• VA will cease public affairs and outreach to Veterans.
• VA will not permanently place headstones or maintain the grounds at VA national cemeteries.
• VA will not process applications for pre-need burials.
• VA will not print new presidential memorial certificates.
@Kathy:
The onus cannot be always on Democrats to shield Americans from the inevitable consequences of our refusal to stop voting Republican.
Reaping and sowing and all that.
Democrats also have zero reason to trust McCarthy. He already had a budget deal with Biden that he is refusing to honor.
@Mikey: It’s interseting to see conservatives openly admitting they want American troops to go unpaid.
@DrDaveT:
Can a head be removed via scope? I figured it required a procedure more akin to a caesarean section.
@DK:
What conservatives? Conservative doesn’t describe the bandits driving the GOP train. They didn’t even need to tie up the engineer to take the helm. Dude just gave it up because he likes the title even if he isn’t in charge.
@Kurtz: yes these sre radicals, as the Financial Times properly named in a headline today. They need to be labelled like that, not even MAGA which outside Democrats circles is not per se effective as a label. Choose phrases that speak to the doubting old school conservatves to toxify these fools.
The mealy mouthed timorouness or sheer illiteracy of American journalists and their bankrupt Horse Race thinking and writing brings real worry.
Else I am modestly relieved to read from a USA interlocuteur that some climate financing injection into one of our development projects won’t be disrupted. Could have upended 3 years work for a nice climate adaptation structure
@Kurtz:
Democrats need to permanently associate the GOP with “Defund the Military”…
@Kurtz:
Democrats need to permanently associate the GOP with “Defund the Military”…
“Republicans are the party that says that government doesn’t work, and then they get elected and prove it.”
P.J. O’Rourke
@Kurtz:
This is true.
The extremist Trump cult has made “conservative” a meaningless term.
Conservative = whatever Trump says. Sound and fury, signifying narcissism.
@DK:
I give fair notice that I intend to steal that phrase quite shamelessly. 😉
Mostly because it’s true.
And also applies so perfectly to the neo-Right in the UK.
@Mikey: Short comedy video, Somalia, the Libertarian Paradise!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ul-Efi1Xys