Democratic Hub
About Us
Tour
FAQ
Signup
Login
  
Home
Forums
Pages
Issues
Laws
Elections
Arguments
Events
Government
U.S.
World
Welcome to our New Political Community - Take a Quick Tour of our Features including our Discussion Forums custom designed for U.S. politics. SIGN UP today to join in the discussion.
Forums > All Posts > What happens in a government shutdown?
  • Forums
  • Categories
  • All Posts
  • Forum Rules
  • FAQ\Help
Displaying all 2 Forum Posts

You must be logged in to reply to a post.
2011-02-18 08:36 AM

Schmidt
Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 1058
We've talked about budgets and debt ceilings in other postings, and now there is more and more talk about a possible government shutdown so I thought I would try bring a little clarity to the understanding.  If you have been following some of the media discussions, you have a right to be confused.

What is adding to the confusion is that we are trying to digest three separate issues simultaneously, and two are coming to a head in March...or at the very latest early April in the case of raising the debt ceiling.

None of the current shutdown discussions are germaine to the 2012 Federal Budget that Obama just submitted to Congress on February 14th.  That budget, which covers PROPOSED expenditures from October 1, 2011 to September 30, 2012, calls for $3.73 trillion of spending and predicts a record $1.6 trillion deficit for the current fiscal year.  Congress has until October 1st to debate/discuss/modify that budget. If they cannot reach agreement on those expenditures by October 1st, they can do like what they have done with the 2011 Federal Budget...pass Continuing Resolutions (CRs) authorizing expenditures at current levels.

The current shutdown discussions pertain to the lack of agreement on the 2011 Federal Budget which started on October 1, of 2010.  The last Continuing Resolution expires on March 4th and there are three possible ways that government could be shutdown at that time. 

First, John Boehner has said that he will not approve any more CRs for government spending beyond March 4th, so he is forcing the House to come to some kind of compromise on spending in the next two weeks. If no resolution is reached and no further CRs are approved, the government shuts down.

Assuming the House passes a compromise spending bill based largely on GOP spending plans, the Democratically controlled Senate can reject that plan and propose one of their own.  If the House and Senate cannot agree by March 4th, the government is shutdown.

Even if the House and Senate agree on spending, Obama has threatened a veto of any bill that has earmarks or compromises his favorite programs.  If Obama vetos the spending bill, government shuts down.

So what happens in this type of a shutdown?  The Washington Post looked back at what happened in 1995, the last time the government shutdown for a similar type of impasse.

"If President Obama and congressional Republicans fail to agree soon on how to fund the final seven months of the fiscal year, some veterans might not receive benefits checks, and other Americans would be unable to apply for Social Security. The State Department might not issue new passports, unemployment statistics would not publish as scheduled, museums and national parks would close, and worse -- piles of elephant manure might pile up in a National Zoo parking lot because workers can't ship it away for composting."

In the 1995 and 1996 shutdowns, "about 260,000 District-area federal employees stayed home, or reported for duty only to be sent packing hours later. Security guards roamed the halls forcing out workers who lingered." Of course, the governmet differentiated between essential and non-essential personnel.  But "even if non-essential workers wanted to work without pay, they could face fines of up to $5,000 or up to two years in prison for violating a federal law that prohibits agencies from accepting volunteer labor."  You can read more about the possible implications of that type of government shutdown in the Washington Post article.

Suppose we get through the budgetary mess by March 4th, and Congress and Obama approve the 2011 Federal Budget, another deadline looms either in late March or early April...the vote on raising the debt ceiling. Some Tea Partiers will refuse to raise the debt ceiling, which was last raised on February 12, 2010 to $14.294 trillion.  What is the implication? Well, it means that government cannot borrow any more money to fund the current year budget deficit of something like $1.5 trillion. So even if the 2011 Federal Budget in the order of Obama's proposed $3.7 trillion is passed, only $2.2 trillion of those funds can be spent beyond end March without raising the debt ceiling.

This potential situation is being portrayed as very bad by Geitner and others, but in reality it is not as bad as the total government shutdown that would follow from the failure to approve the 2011 Budget or another Contiunuing Resolution.  It would, of course, result in a large curtailment of government services, but the Treasury could use creative accounting tricks to ensure that the interest payments on the current debt would be paid as a first priority.  Some of the ways for doing that have been described by Josh Barro of Real Clear Markets, Debt Limit Impasse Could Drag on For Months. One of the mostly likely tricks described by Borro is as follows:

"The most financially promising of those options would be to "disinvest" government trust funds that hold Treasury debt, most principally the Social Security Trust Fund. Essentially, the trust funds would redeem bonds they hold ahead of schedule, in exchange for a promise to be paid back later -- and such an IOU would not count against the debt limit. Because the trust fund balances exceed $2.5 trillion, this tactic could be used to run the government for several years without hitting the debt limit.

"This tactic works because the debt limit applies to gross debt, including trust fund holdings, which are debts the federal government owes to itself. The government's true indebtedness is better reflected by net debt, also called Debt Held by the Public. By reducing the amount of debt that the government owes to itself, the federal government can grow the net debt while staying within the gross debt cap."

However, as Barro notes, a raid on the Social Security Trust Fund "would also be politically fraught; while the Social Security Trust Fund is an accounting fiction, most Social Security beneficiaries don't see it that way."

I posted all this stuff to hopefully clarify some of what you are hearing now in the media and from politicians that like to obfuscate.  I hope I have not added to the confusion.

2011-02-19 08:59 AM

Schmidt
Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 1058
Okay the House has taken Boehner off the hook for now at least.  Last night they passed a Continuing Resolution that cuts $60 billion from Obama's proposed budget. The bill passed 235 to 189, with three Republicans joining all the chamber's Democrats in voting no. From the Huffington Post:

Cuts included an additional $8.4 billion from the EPA, already facing $3 billion in cuts from the main bill.

White House "czars," or advisers would also be banned by prohibiting funds to be used to pay for so-called czars on health care, climate change, global warming, green jobs, automobiles, Guantanamo Bay Closure, Pay and Fairness Doctrine.

Two amendments de-fund the president's health care law and take steps toward blocking the legislation they have already voted to repeal. The amendments, both introduced by Iowa Republican Rep. Steve King, would block funding to implement health care reform and prohibit agencies from hiring staff to implement the law, effectively rendering its protections against insurance companies unenforceable.

Another longtime Republican target, Planned Parenthood, would be banned from receiving funding under an amendment offered by Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), which Democrats called an "all-out war on women." The measure would prevent the organization from receiving any federal funding because it performs abortions -- even though using government money for abortions is already illegal -- undermining programs for reproductive health and pregnancy prevention.

Barney Frank attempted to restore $131 million in funds to the Securities and Exchange Commission, but that amendment also failed in a 160-270 vote.

So this is the Republican agenda for everyone to see...anti-health care, anti-environment, anti-Planned Parenthood, anti-Wall Street regulation, anti-Obama...pro corporation.  The next step is the Senate...

But what about the $1.5 trillion deficit?  Wow those Republicans sure know how to make a dent in that...$60 billion...and nothing about jobs.

You must be logged in to reply to a post.


 
About Us
Contact Us
FAQ
Advertise
Links
Login
Sign Up
  


� Copyright 2009-2012 Democratic Hub. All Rights Reserved.
Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy


OBAMA ACCOMPLISHMENTS - REPUBLICAN DIVORCES - REPUBLICAN INFIDELITY & AFFAIRS - REPUBLICAN SCANDALS & CONTROVERSIES