Shutdown

Pared back to its simplest level, the requirements for action by western government are two-fold. Collect money; distribute money. I posed this view to a former senior civil servant. “What about policy?” he asked, horrified by my analysis. My reply: “Sure but once a policy is formulated, don’t you ask, ‘what will it cost and where will we get the money from?’”

Approval of the American federal government budget is extraordinarily complex. Negotiations start early in the year. Both Congress and the Executive battle over what will be spent by each department of state. More times than not, the budget, often 7,000 pages or more, is approved by the two branches in time for Christmas. Sometimes it isn’t.

Ronald Reagan’s administration went through four shutdowns. Most people don’t remember any of them. The one shutdown that people do remember happened in 1995/6, though I doubt whether 10% of Americans remember what caused it. A weakened Clinton administration refused to let Congressional Republicans, led by Newt Gingrich, reduce the education, health and welfare budgets affecting America’s poor. However, I’m pretty sure that the vast majority of Americans remember Monica Lewinsky, a news story of a different kind.

President Trump has shut the federal government down because he cannot persuade Democrats to fund his Wall. His budget passed the lame duck House of Representatives but failed in the Senate, at a time when Republicans had majorities in both Houses. Why did the Senate not pass the budget? The sixty Senate votes needed to defeat a Democratic filibuster were just not there. As a result, there is now a partial shutdown of the federal government.

I’m fascinated by the use of the word “partial.” In previous shutdowns, I have not heard this term used. In theory, when the federal government shuts down, all federal employees have to stop working because Congress has not authorised the expenditure to pay them. Put simply, money is unavailable to pay wages.

But there is flexibility and money in the federal system. Essential work continues. The Secret Service will continue to operate. An exercise takes place within government which could be described as ‘fruit from the lower branches.’ The first federal employees to suffer are those working in the national parks.

Whilst I feel sorry for tourists whose vacation plans may be wrecked, many national parks close at this time of year. Glacier, Yellowstone and others parks in the North West, northern Midwest and North East are not open to the public. Maintenance work will not get done but, in the scope of things, would there be damage? Sure there will. For example, the Grand Canyon has a maintenance backlog of $330 for maintenance projects and restoration of historic buildings. The work is on hold. Human waste and litter aren’t cleared. It’s an environmental nightmare.

If a federal government department is short of the cash, it can borrow from other departments and their pension funds. There is always money available as Peter is robbed to pay Paul. Of course, if the shutdown lasts for months, rather than days, the position changes. At the two-week mark of this shutdown, the President told Congressional leaders he was prepared for the standoff to last months or even years. Trump confirmed this during a Rose Garden press conference: “Absolutely I said that,” he said, when asked if Democratic Senate Minority Leader, Chuck Schumer, was correct in his claim that the White House was prepared to continue the shutdown indefinitely.

This is not the place to look at the humanity issues in the current operation of US immigration policy. It’s too complex and distasteful, not to mention inhumane. However, the politics have horrified me. For example, last weekend, the President stated he had the authority to override Congress on grounds of “clear and present danger.” This is absolute nonsense. In December, Senator Pat Leahy told The Washington Post, “Over the past two years, Congress has provided $1.7 billion for southern border fencing. So far only 6% of the funds have been spent.” Where can there be imminent danger if little government action is taking place? But late tonight, an appearance has been scheduled for the President to speak to the nation. My guess is he will invoke clear and present danger, by-passing Congress. If so, I’m certain the Courts will get involved. It will be a mess.

Democrats in the new House of Representatives have passed Bills to deal with budget issues in order to re-open the government but they denied Trump’s demand for $5bn to pay for the Wall. Senate Republican Leader, Mitch McConnell says he will only take up “spending legislation approved by the President.” In other words, no $5bn from the Democrats, no end to shut down.

Some years ago, I went to Dodge City. It’s beginning to look like Congress and the Executive Branch have moved there. Trump tweets ad nauseam that the Democrats are to blame for the shut down because they are refusing to see how much danger arises from weak policing of the southern border.

From where I sit, it looks like a President having a tantrum because the Congressional Democrats will not bend a knee. But could he have a case? He campaigned hard on “Build the Wall” and was voted in, partly as a result. Has Congress the right to thwart the will of the people? Actually, yes it does. As for Trump’s claim that the Mexicans will pay, well we all say things in the heat of the moment and I doubt anyone believed it.

In the meantime, already more than 800,000 federal employees are without salary. There will be delays on processing tax refunds to the middle classes, cuts to food stamps, landlords will demand rent and mortgagees their monthly repayments. The courts will have to close, public services will be delivered slowly or not at all. And there is no assurance that the federal government will make up the employees’ losses. No wonder a union for federal employees has begun a law suit, alleging the partial shutdown is illegal because it has either forced people out of work or to work without pay.

The shutdown may not be entirely the fault of the Republicans or Trump. When Reagan did not get what he wanted in a budget negotiation, he was patient and came back later to try again. Were the Democrats to offer a deal that delivered part of the $5bn but with strings about its expenditure, such as a time limit in which the funds are spent, as well as better terms for DACA and the Dreamers, would Trump turn the deal down and extend the shutdown? Unlikely. He could spin the deal into a win. Surely, Democratic legislators who spend their lives negotiating can find their way through to reach agreement.

I am reminded that we in UK are watching our politicians struggle to negotiate their way out of a cul-de-sac, i.e. Brexit. Maybe I shouldn’t be so critical. Maybe governing is a lot harder than it seems. No, it isn’t.

 

*DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) is an American immigration policy that allows some individuals who were brought to the United States illegally as children to receive a renewable two-year period of deferred action from deportation and become eligible for a work permit in the U.S.