BURSTAmerican politics is not American football. Political writers like to drop an occasional football term or analogy into their stories about congressional shenanigans or campaign trail hijinks, but any attempt to extend the metaphor at length would seem pretentious, awkward and forced — an artless case of parallel parsing.
That all came to mind when I considered that tomorrow is “sudden death” eve for the federal government. At midnight Friday, the government is slated to run out of money. That means Saturday, when the government is scheduled to reopen, it won’t — except for those people designated as “essential workers” (more recently re-named, for p.c. purposes, as “excepted employees”) — for instance, the military, air traffic controllers and essential health workers.
Since 1976 there have been 21 government shutdowns, the longest lasting 34 days, from Dec. 22, 2018 to Jan. 25, 2019. The second longest was 21 days in December 1995 ("the Gingrich that stole Christmas"). And the third longest was 16 days in October 2013. Others lasted on average one to three days.
If we tried to describe this week’s moment in football terms it would be that Congress has its back to its goal, fourth down and 20. Absent completion of an omnibus, wrap-up bill, the safe call is a punt — a short-term continuing resolution that will reportedly move things to mid-March.
It should be noted that football teams are not allowed either to set or extend the time for when the game should end. Congress, on the other hand, has authority under the Constitution to make-up its rules as it goes along.
The larger question is how did Congress find itself in this year’s precarious predicament in the first place? According to the Budget Act, Congress is to take final action on all 12 of its regular appropriations bills by Oct. 1, the beginning of the fiscal year. The House Appropriations Committee reported all 12 of its bills by early July, and the House passed five of them. The Senate Appropriations Committee also reported all of its bills in July but has passed none on the floor since.
Back on Sept. 23, 2024, five days before the new fiscal year began, Congress sent to President Biden, and he signed into law, a bill that extended the life of government through Dec. 20, 2024. The spending levels were mostly at the previous fiscal year’s levels but with some disaster monies and farm aid thrown in. Since then, no regular appropriations bills have been enacted into law, either individually or bundled.
This lengthy delay in getting the current fiscal year off the ground is the result of party divisions and differences. Democrats control the White House and Senate, and Republicans narrowly control the House. There is now considerable flux and jockeying over the partisan configuration of government next year. The House has already lost three of its newly reelected members to presidential nominations: Rep. Mike Waltz (R-Fla.) as National Security Council adviser; Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), as UN ambassador; and Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) as attorney general (since withdrawn).
There is an 11-month gap from the election through the end of fiscal 2025 to be filled by the priorities of Republican President-elect Trump and the two-chamber Republican majorities in the 119th Congress. Yes, this is the customary guessing game played-out every four years. But politics has become much more fractious and partisan: small differences can sometimes be blown way out of proportion, creating legislative gridlock.
While the House and Senate Appropriations committees have traditionally operated more above the partisan fray than other committees, that pattern has morphed over the last few decades. Appropriators are whipsawed by their party leaders today to deliver on such key issues such as border security, disaster relief and foreign assistance. Mounting deficits and debt are another factor slowing down action. While little talked about publicly by most members during the campaign, the deficit remains the 900-pound gorilla in the room.
One cannot explain-away Congress’s tardiness for not completing its work on time. The excuses may be plausible, even reasonable, but they are no reason for Congress to avoid addressing its key constitutional mandate to exercise its power of the purse.
According to pollsters, the deficit was not a major factor in either the 2024 congressional or presidential election outcomes. However, general dissatisfaction with the government’s performance certainly was a component. The narrow margins of party control in both houses next year plus some of the more dramatic proposals being thrown into the mix by the new administration do not bode well for forward progress in the next round of downs.
Don Wolfensberger is a 28-year congressional staff veteran culminating as chief-of-staff of the House Rules Committee in 1995. He is author of, “Congress and the People: Deliberative Democracy on Trial” (2000), and, “Changing Cultures in Congress: From Fair Play to Power Plays” (2018).