| Legislators currently disagree on foreign aid, specifically whether the U.S. ought to shell out more funding for the war effort in Ukraine, as well as border control. One flank of the Republican Party also advocates massive spending cuts—1 percent across the board!—to try to get the big-picture budgetary situation under control. These are not new tensions, but rather ones that have been somewhere between boiling and simmering for the better part of the winter. (More from Reason‘s Eric Boehm on this.)
“I think the odds [of a shutdown] are 50-50 at this point,” Rep. Patrick McHenry (R–N.C.) told CBS News. The thing is, government shutdowns are little more than an act: Though they pack a dramatic punch, and are disruptive to many, plenty of agencies continue to provide services and they don’t end up saving the federal government very much money at all.
A shutdown would, for example, pause trainings for new air traffic controllers, but keep existing ones at work. It would not halt administration of benefits for veterans, but it would temporarily pause the maintenance at Veterans Affairs cemeteries. Food stamps would continue to be sent out and food safety inspection workers would stay on the job, but most National Park Service sites would close down. Loans insured by the Federal Housing Administration would probably be delayed.
But, by and large, shutdowns are not invitations to truly reconsider the role the federal government plays in our lives. They’re not opportunities to reflect on which agencies and programs we actually need—to the extent that we need any of them. They’re perceived as painful and semi-embarrassing for legislators, even if they don’t affect very much. They generate headlines (like this one, whoops). Eventually, Congress comes together and somebody concedes something and yet another supersized ream of taxpayer dollars gets blown right through. Rinse and repeat.
This time is a little different, though, because Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D–N.Y.) is currently traveling through Ukraine—funding for which has been a source of major disagreement, particularly in the House—and has “said he hopes to show how congressional foot-dragging on more aid has hurt Ukraine’s efforts on the battlefield and to appeal to House Republicans to take action before it’s too late,” per The New York Times. Sooner or later, Congress will need to figure out where it stands on Ukraine funding. |