Government Shutdown Showdown 2013: a Primer

A key question will be whether this week's machinations are enough to let off Republican steam, or whether they will stand by vows not to fund the government if it means Obamacare moves forward.

On a separate track, the House is expected next week to pass a bill to extend the debt ceiling, but with all sorts of conditions attached. Such conditions will include a one-year delay to the requirement that virtually all Americans get health coverage, and immediate authorization of the Keystone Pipeline, a high-profile energy initiative with big environmental consequences.

The president, as noted above, is refusing to negotiate over the debt ceiling, but the House isn't taking his promise seriously. So this piece is highly unlikely to be resolved quickly.


Government shutdowns are disruptive and expensive things. Blasting through a debt ceiling is a potential economy-killer of a thing that has never been tested before by a major superpower with the ability to continue borrowing at cheap rates.

If the federal government "shuts down," active-duty military will still be paid and national-security workers and air-traffic controllers will also stay on the job. But those involved in mundane government business -- think national park personnel, people who process government claims and data technicians at places like the Labor Department or Census Bureau -- will effectively shut down for the duration of the standoff.

So you won't be able to go to national parks or monuments, new Social Security and Medicare claims could be delayed, and clinical trials at the National Institutes of Health will stop enrollment. If past is precedent, federal workers will be paid retroactively for the missed days, so taxpayers would wind up paying for services that weren't provided during any period where funding ran out.

If we hit the debt ceiling, the possible consequences are difficult to predict but much more dire. Wall Street would probably freak out if the U.S. government found itself unable to make good on all its commitments. A spike in Treasury bond rates would fuel an increase in mortgage and credit-card rates, and might leave financial and energy markets across the world reeling.

We'd still have money coming in to the federal government, mainly in the form of tax receipts, but the Obama administration would have to make some extraordinarily stark choices. Presumably, we would cover the interest on our debt, or worse economic calamities would follow, and continue defense spending, Social Security, Medicare and the like.

But funding for everything else the federal government does -- in education, transportation, criminal justice, food inspections, air safety -- would be in question until we could get our collective credit card back.

Keep in mind that the last time we saw brinkmanship like this, the United States had its credit rating downgraded by Standard & Poor's amid the mere threat of coming up against the debt ceiling. That makes borrowing itself more expensive, making for a more problematic debt spiral for taxpayers regardless of how this plays out.


The conventional wisdom received from those who survived the last government shutdown, in the Gingrich-Clinton battles of the mid-'90s, is that whoever gets blamed for a government shutdown pays a price. Clinton emerged from those fights stronger than ever, winning reelection in 1996 and then picking up seats for his party in 1998. So for a while since then, government shutdowns have been essentially off the table.

But for a crop of newer members of Congress, some of whom where in high school or college during the Clinton-Gingrich years, the prospect of a shutdown over spending isn't that horrible. They represent constituents who hate the government, generally, and standing up for having Uncle Sam spend less might not be a bad thing.

That's the direction they're being pushed in by outside groups that are threatening primary challengers against anyone seen as enabling the Obama agenda. Shutting down the government over Obamacare, and/or taking a stand on runaway government spending is a fight worth having, in the view of some.

There's even a sliver of members of Congress who insist that hitting the debt ceiling isn't that big a deal because it would force the president to make the kind of hard spending choices that Washington should have made years ago.

There's also a debate on who would take the blame if very bad things happen. The House will pass a spending bill and it will pass a debt ceiling bill; there will just be so many conditions that are part of it that the Senate and the president won't go along.

In the view of House Republicans, it won't be their fault that Obama and his Democratic allies simply refused to negotiate. And for a president who has had little working relationship with Republicans during his time in office, it's another huge distraction from his agenda.

-- This embed didnt make it to copy for story id = 20317271.
  • 1
  • |
  • 2
Join the Discussion
blog comments powered by Disqus
You Might Also Like...