With the news cycle, social media, and emails from Penn State administrative offices, the government shutdown was impossible to miss. As it broke the record for longest government shutdown in history at 35 days (the previous being 22), many were asking the same question: when will it end?
Whenever people hear that the government has been shut down, panic usually sets in with the notion that all order and control is lost and the country’s safety and security is at stake. In reality, all a shutdown is is a disagreement on how to appropriate funds for the fiscal year. Coming to agreements on anything in Congress is difficult (for good reason), but when the houses are divided between parties, as they are right now, it is especially trying. While a solution is reached, instead of completely dissolving all government departments and agencies, only “non-essential” federal programs are suspended. Some of these include NASA, the IRS, EPA, and various departments like education and labor. Ultimately, the decision on what stays and goes depends on if workers in their respective departments are able to suspend their function for however long it takes the government to reach a compromise.
So what’s the harm in suspending departments considered nonessential? If they aren’t essential to the running of a nation, why is it such a big deal? “Essential” is considered anyone in the federal government whose job concerns national security or public safety. Yes, it’s vital that we keep these employees working during a time of duress for the public, but in the words of Patrick Conway, the chief knowledge officer in the Department of the Army, being called a “non-essential” worker is “kind of a slap in the face.” How could you blame him? When your job is to analyze how knowledge is distributed throughout the armed forces, being deemed inferior to other governmental positions can be extremely demoralizing, and not just for those working with the Army.
The government, once it’s back in action, will process payrolls and compensate the furloughed (temporarily laid off) workers, but until that time, federal workers are on unpaid leave. By January 10, about 800,000 employees in 9 different departments felt the monetary impact of their suspension. This impact reached its peak on January 25, at the end of the shutdown. 35 days without work meant more than a month without a paycheck. The morale of workers is bound to sink, leaving them wondering if they should even keep working for the federal government. Jared Hautamaki, an attorney for the Environmental Protection Agency for the past ten years, was considering getting a different job even before the shutdown. His reasoning was that federal workers are underpaid, disrespected, and now considered nonessential in numerous departments. It seems that shutdowns are the last straw for hard-working federal employees.
For Trump, however, the last straw was the Democrats’ refusal to include $5 Billion toward the construction of his beloved border wall, even though the original U.S. Senate-approved spending bill included $1.6 Billion for other measures of border security. Trump claimed that he would back off from his demand, but contradicted this claim a few days later. After failed negotiations between the houses, the shutdown went into effect. It did not fail to fulfill Trump’s promise that it would be “very long.” Accusations were thrown from the president throughout the duration of the shutdown, toward Democrats, of course, along with threats to declare a national emergency. Trump didn’t seem to be helping the cause for an already divided legislative branch.
On January 25, Trump announced that the government would reopen for three weeks with no additional funding for the border wall–looks like his fervent vow to fund the project was broken. Although the shutdown has finally come to an end, the president claims he is ready to resume the government’s state or declare a national emergency as a loophole to follow through with his widely opposed plans.
Are government shutdowns the most effective method to deal with disagreement on the allocation of federal funds? Is it worth the economic and social impact? The president created a situation for himself where his approval ratings dropped by ten points from Republican women and suburban men. Workers were forced to join the lines for food banks to sustain themselves. National Parks were vandalized due to being understaffed, causing damage that could take 300 years to recover from. The economy took a $3 Billion hit. The shutdown was undoubtably harmful to the public in more ways than these, and fear of another beginning again on February 15 is keeping people on their toes. As the next few weeks go by, Congress is scrambling to reach agreement on the best steps to take to prevent yet another shutdown–some congressmen have even taken open stances against having shutdowns in the first place. Whatever may happen, at least they know they always have the relentless support of their president.
Featured Image Credit:
“FBI Workers Visiting Food Banks.” The Girl Sun, 21 Jan. 2019, FBI Workers Visiting Food Banks.
