It seems like every few months, we have to listen to another crisis in Washington, D.C., about the debt limit and potential U.S. federal government shutdowns. There is last-minute negotiations, breathless news coverage and the risk of millions of government employees being furloughed and billions of dollars in government activity grinding to a halt. Usually these crises are averted at the last possible second, but this isn’t something that’s safe or reliable to count on. The situation shouldn’t be this way, and playing political games like this risks the health of our economy and the financial security of future generations of Americans.
To start with, it’s a terrible development that the debt limit and using it to threaten a government shutdown has become a political football. There are consequences to the federal government shutting down that go far beyond hurting the opposing political party or stopping programs one doesn’t like. By definition, the debt limit controls how much money the government can borrow to cover its bills. As long as the U.S. government is spending more money than it’s taking in, which it has been for decades under both Republican and Democratic presidents, not extending the debt limit creates the risk of the U.S. defaulting on loans it already has outstanding.
By defaulting on loans, the federal government would hurt its credit rating, which would make it harder and more expensive for it to borrow needed money in the future. Millions of federal workers across the country and their families would be left in limbo as jobs would be furloughed. Government programs that affect millions across the country would be stopped, or severely affected as the government goes into a shutdown mode. It would also set off a chain reaction that would hurt the entire economy, which is why business leaders have been lobbying Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell to plead for his caucus to not block a debt-limit increase. There is no win for anyone in creating a government shutdown and default for the federal government.
Why do we have this problem? Because the U.S. federal government has a terrible and inconsistent system of passing budgets and funding. The last full annual budget passed in the United States was in 2009 after President Obama first took office. Since then we’ve been operating solely on continuing resolutions and temporary funding measures. There are not the same measures of accountability and process to ensure a full budget is passed like there are in other parts of the world, or even in parts of the United States.
For example, in Minnesota, the state legislature must pass a two-year budget in the first year of the state legislative term or else the government shuts down. With this hard deadline in place, a budget is usually finally agreed to and the issue is covered for the next two years. In other countries like the United Kingdom, passing an annual budget is considered to be one of the essential requirements of the sitting administration. If the House of Commons does not pass the government budget for the year ahead, that is taken as a sign of no confidence in the Prime Minister and their government and can trigger an early election. Safeguards like these ensure a budget is passed in other places and that political games aren’t played with the essential functions of government.
So what can we do? The United States should implement a system of requiring a full annual budget be passed every year. This will prevent the constant kicking the can down the road and terrible timing that always accompanies continuing resolutions. There should also be consequences for members of Congress. If there’s a government shutdown, Congress should have to deal with the same furloughs and restrictions as its fellow federal employees. We as voters can also provide accountability by voting out Congress members who play games with the budget. Our country deserves and can do better than this.
Connor Kockler is a student at St. John’s University. He enjoys writing, politics and news, among other interests.
