A History Of US Government Shutdowns

All 21 Government Shutdowns in U.S. History

Duration and Year of Government Shutdowns

 The dome of the U.S. Capitol is picture here in January 2011. 

In United States politics, “government shutdowns” occur whenever Congress fails to pass or the President of the United States refuses to sign or vetoes legislation funding the operation of some or all government agencies. Under the Antideficiency Act of 1982, the federal government must “shutdown” the affected agencies by both furloughing non-essential personnel and curtailing agency activities and services that do not directly relate to national security.

Key Takeaways

• Government shutdowns happen when legislation to allocate money needed for the operation of the government agencies fails to be enacted.
• By law, most government agencies must furlough their non-essential personnel and stop or limit their activities during a government shutdown.
• While few last very long, all government shutdowns result in increased costs of government and inconvenience for many citizens. 

While most government shutdowns are of relatively short duration, they all result in the disruption to government services and increased costs to the government—and thus taxpayers—due to lost labor. According to the financial rating agency Standard & Poor's, the 16-day shutdown from October 1, to October 17, 2013, had “taken $24 billion out of the economy,” and “shaved at least 0.6 percent off annualized fourth-quarter 2013 GDP growth.”

There have been 20 government shutdowns in modern U.S. history, and they've done nothing to help Congress' abysmal approval ratings. There were six shutdowns ranging from eight to 17 days in the late 1970s, but the duration of government shutdowns shrank dramatically beginning in the 1980s.

And then there was the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, in late 1995; that shutdown lasted three weeks and sent nearly 300,000 government workers home without paychecks. The gridlock came during President Bill Clinton's administration. The dispute between the Democrats and the Republicans was over disparate economic forecasts and whether the Clinton White House budget would result in a deficit or not. 

Weaponized Shutdowns

Occasionally, both Congress and presidents use government shutdowns as a way of accomplishing political goals not directly related to larger budgetary concerns like reducing the national debt or deficit. For example, in 2013, the Republican majority in the House of Representatives forced a lengthy shutdown in an unsuccessful attempt to get Democratic President Barack Obama to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

The third shutdown during the Donald Trump presidency began at midnight on December 22, 2018, when funding for nearly a quarter of the federal government ran out. The partial shutdown came when Congress and President Trump were unable to agree on the inclusion in the spending bill of some $5.5 billion requested by President Trump for completion of an anti-illegal immigration security wall along the Mexican border. As of December 26, 2018, the shutdown remained in effect, with congressional leaders predicting that it could extend beyond January 1, 2019.

More Recent Major Government Shutdowns

The most recent government major shutdowns before 2018 came in the 1996 fiscal year, during the Clinton administration.

• The first government shutdown of the Clinton administration lasted five full days from Nov. 13 through Nov. 19, 1995, according to the Congressional Research Service. Some 800,000 federal workers were furloughed during that shutdown.
• The second government shutdown was the longest government shutdown in U.S. history. It lasted 21 full days from Dec. 15, 1995, to Jan. 6, 1996. Some 284,000 government workers were furloughed and another 475,000 worked without pay, according to the Congressional Research Service.

List of All Government Shutdowns and their Duration

This list of government shutdowns in the past was drawn from Congressional Research Service reports:

• 2018 (President Donald Trump): Dec. 22 to (ongoing)
• 2018 (President Donald Trump): Jan. 20 to Jan. 23 - 3 days
• 2018 (President Donald Trump): Feb. 9 – 1 day.
• 2013 (President Barack Obama): Oct. 1 to Oct. 17 - 16 days
• 1995-1996 (President Bill Clinton): December 5, 1995, to January 6, 1996, - 21 days
• 1995 (President Bill Clinton): Nov. 13 to 19 - 5 days
• 1990 (President George H.W. Bush): October 5 to 9 - 3 days
• 1987 (President Ronald Reagan): December 18 to December 20 - 1 day
• 1986 (President Ronald Reagan): October 16 to October 18 - 1 day
• 1984 (President Ronald Reagan): October 3 to October 5 - 1 day
• 1984 (President Ronald Reagan): September 30 to October 3 - 2 days
• 1983 (President Ronald Reagan): November 10 to November 14 - 3 days
• 1982 (President Ronald Reagan): December 17 to December 21 - 3 days
• 1982 (President Ronald Reagan): September 30 to October 2 - 1 day
• 1981 (President Ronald Reagan): November 20 to November 23 - 2 days
• 1979 (President Jimmy Carter): September 30 to October 12 - 11 days
• 1978 (President Jimmy Carter): September 30 to October 18 18 days

• 1977 (President Jimmy Carter): November 30 to December 9 - 8 days
• 1977 (President Jimmy Carter): October 31 to November 9 - 8 days
• 1977 (President Jimmy Carter): September 30 to October 13 - 12 days
• 1976 (President Gerald Ford): September 30 to October 11 - 10 days

...

Me With My Dear Friend of 53 Years Bill Baldwin Near The Golden Gate Bridge

Views Of The Golden Gate Bridge At Thanksgiving

Circling The Moon-A Momentous Moment 50 Years Ago

50 years ago I was a young man who had just turned 20. I had been married ten months. I was a young college student in the US Navy Reserve. My unit had been called up for Vietnam in January. I was destined for a motor patrol boat on the Mekong delta (A blood bath for the US Navy) I passed the test for officer candidate school by one point. This saved my life. I was reeling from the shock of the assassination of two great political leaders (Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King.) Over 16,000 young American men and women had died in Vietnam this year.

My new wife and I came to Ralph Wallace III's house to watch a momentous moment. An Apollo capsule with three American astronauts was going to circle the moon. As we watched the moonscape on television, Astronaut James Lovell gave the most stirring talk. It uplifted all of us. It touched us. It gave us hope. It was one of the most magical moments of my life.

The Powerful French-Speaking Minority In Canada

CANADA

Civility, Overrated

Most Americans think of French-speaking Canadians as exclusive to the province of Quebec.

But, in reality, Francophones live throughout Canada, especially in Ontario, where around 500,000 people speak French as their first language.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford might have considered that number before he cut services in French for the province’s residents last month, including canceling plans for a new French-language university in Toronto.

“They don’t know that because we’re a minority, we have fewer rights than them,” said Daphnie Bazinet, an 11th grader from Cornwall, Ontario, who was among a group of teens in a high school improv tournament that attracted coverage from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. “Personally, when I go somewhere like a restaurant or a store I always ask for service in French. It’s important, because if we don’t ask for it, we won’t have it.”

Ford backtracked on some of the cuts, but didn’t restore the university project, the Canadian Press news agency reported.

But, as Bazinet’s comments and protests throughout the province have demonstrated, the controversy won’t go away. There are over 60 French-speaking high schools in the province. Many of those students want to attend a local French-language university, reported broadcaster CTV.

It’s no surprise that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, a Liberal, expressed disappointment over Ford’s move.

Quebecois voters opted to remain in largely English-speaking Canada in 1980 and 1995. It seems like they’re not in the mood for more referenda. But the possibility remains, and every time the issue of secession comes up, the world shudders at the thought of instability in an important economy.

Meanwhile, Andrew Scheer, leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, the federal counterpart of Ford’s Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario, is in damage control mode, wrote iPolitics – a Canadian version of Politico.

“We should always try to improve the services to official-language-minority communities, not reduce them, because Canada’s bilingualism is a strength and an asset that must be protected,” said Scheer’s spokesperson.

Ford, by the way, is the brother of the late mayor of Toronto, Rob Ford, who famously stirred controversy with his racist remarks, public drunkenness and admitting to smoking crack cocaine before he succumbed to cancer in 2016.

One can’t judge the premier by his brother’s record. It’s hard, however, not to compare Doug’s tin political ear to his brother’s.

In a similar vein, writing in the Conversation, Bishop’s University historian David Webster noted that Canada’s English-language media didn’t devote much ink to Ford’s cuts until protesters started raising their voices. The media, like Ford, didn’t take the matter seriously, it seems, until people started shouting.

Civility can be overrated.

The Most Serious threats for 2019

Editor's Note

The following is an excerpt from the Threat Lens 2019 Annual Forecast. This forecast does not focus on every global security trend expected in 2019. Instead, it concentrates on Threat Lens' core interest areas and examines the trends we expect to see shaping that space next year. The full version is available to Threat Lens subscribers.

Great Power Competition: The Industrial Espionage Threat

The great power competition will produce a surge in corporate espionage incidents involving Western companies in 2019. The rivalry will drive China and Russia to maintain, if not accelerate, their already-intense efforts. Chinese activity will eclipse Russia's, since China has more resources, though the United States is also more focused on countering China. Since the United States offers the most targets for corporate espionage, U.S. companies will be the ones affected the most, although the threat is not limited to American companies. The companies most likely to be targeted are in sectors that the Chinese and Russians have prioritized in strategic documents.

China will be driven to engage in corporate espionage as it seeks to reach technological self-sufficiency and to offset the adverse impacts of the trade war and continuing U.S. efforts to cut its access to foreign markets. Deepening financial pressure due to sanctions and a drive to make up for technological deficiencies will, meanwhile, drive Russia to conduct more corporate espionage. An intensification of U.S. counterintelligence efforts devoted to corporate espionage will bring more of these cases to light. The United States laid the groundwork for this initiative in November 2018 in a move that will fuel a surge in manpower and resources to counter Chinese corporate espionage.

As a result of these trends, in 2019 we are likely to see more arrests and indictments of Russian and Chinese intelligence officers, along with the agents they've recruited. We are also likely to see corporate espionage activity against U.S. companies in third countries — something that arrests or warnings issued by governments will reveal. Cyber operations will also play a factor, so we will be looking for reports of cyberattacks and other examples of compromised electronic communication linked to China or Russia.

China and Russia will, of course, respond to the increased U.S. scrutiny and will make the operating environment harder for U.S. companies in those countries. We expect to see hostile intelligence agencies detain or harass U.S. intelligence operatives, diplomats or civilians, such as employees of Western-linked nongovernmental organizations. Among other things, we expect Beijing and Moscow to increase their monitoring of Western business travelers and expatriates as they search for potential intelligence officers not using official cover.

But China will be hesitant to act too overtly in its response, since it still requires U.S. investment and technology, which necessitates the presence of U.S. companies. But China would be less likely to show restraint on this front if the United States were to sanction large Chinese financial institutions and tech companies — something U.S. officials have hinted they might do.

China will be hesitant to act too overtly in its response to Washington's crackdown on its spying activities, since it still requires U.S. investment and technology, which necessitates the presence of U.S. companies.

The U.S.-Iran Collision Course: Disruptions Ahead

The increase in U.S.-Iranian tensions will raise the risk of aggressive Iranian action indirectly affecting, or directly targeting, civilians and companies. The United States will continue its hard-line sanctions policy while more aggressive action by Western, Israeli and Gulf Arab intelligence services will prompt retaliatory action from Iran.

The breakdown of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and the reimplementation of sanctions weakened moderate factions in Iran — which are more in favor of outreach to the West — and empowered more hard-line elements, including the country's effective intelligence services. This will increase the likelihood of more aggressive Iranian action, including cyberattacks, hybrid warfare and even physical attacks.

As a result of these trends, additional reports of malicious Iranian cyber activity will occur in 2019. Iran has the intent and capability of conducting a variety of cyberattacks targeting Israeli, Gulf and Western companies, and it has already laid the groundwork for such operations.

Iran plays a numbers game in its approach to cyberattacks, preferring large numbers of attacks despite a low success rate. The most threatened companies will be those with ties to the governments of Israel, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates or the United States. Iran's expanding target set and rapidly improving capabilities mean more sectors will be at risk of everything from distributed denial of service attacks to the theft of sensitive data.

Physical attacks conducted by Iranian intelligence services against Gulf Arab, Israeli or Western targets or Iranian dissidents will become more likely. Iran can stir up any one of its many proxies or other groups it has links to, and that move could increase political unrest and attacks in their respective areas of operations. Such groups include Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Popular Mobilization Units in Iraq, militant groups in Bahrain, the Houthis in Yemen, the Taliban in Afghanistan and Shiites in Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province.

Although areas where Iran has a direct presence or influential proxies are more likely to be affected, its global reach (it has attempted attacks on five continents through its embassies and proxy networks in the past decade alone) means that action anywhere is possible. Iran will also have an incentive to take more action against Westerners on its territory to use as bargaining chips. This could include blocking the entry of Westerners, harassing them in Iran or even detaining them.

Scott Stewart supervises Stratfor's analysis of terrorism and security issues. Before joining Stratfor, he was a special agent with the U.S. State Department for 10 years and was involved in hundreds of terrorism investigations.

C

The Long Term Implications Of The Arrest of Huawei's CFO

https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/what-arrest-huawei-cfo-us-china-trade-war?id=743c2bc617&e=1bd154cf7d&uuid=2c36852f-322c-452b-a81a-e801a4976293&utm_source=Topics%2C+Themes+and+Regions&utm_campaign=0b51cee022-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_06_07_34&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_743c2bc617-0b51cee022-53655957&mc_cid=0b51cee022&mc_eid=[UNIQID]#/entry/jsconnect?client_id=644347316&target=%2Fdiscussion%2Fembed%3Fc%3D1544129216472%26title%3DWhat%2Bthe%2BArrest%2Bof%2BHuawei%2527s%2BCFO%2BMeans%2Bfor%2Bthe%2BU.S.-China%2BTrade%2BWar%26vanilla_category_id%3D1%26vanilla_identifier%3D293036%26vanilla_url%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fworldview.stratfor.com%252Farticle%252Fwhat-arrest-huawei-cfo-us-china-trade-war%253Fid%253D743c2bc617%2526e%253D1bd154cf7d%2526uuid%253D2c36852f-322c-452b-a81a-e801a4976293%2526utm_source%253DTopics%25252C%252BThemes%252Band%252BRegions%2526utm_campaign%253D0b51cee022-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_06_07_34%2526utm_medium%253Demail%2526utm_term%253D0_743c2bc617-0b51cee022-53655957%2526mc_cid%253D0b51cee022%2526mc_eid%253D%255BUNIQID%255D

An American Woman Whose Hair Helped To Win World War II

Mary Babnick Brown was an American woman who donated her long blond hair to be used as crosshairs in Norden bombsights in WW II.
Brown was a Coloradan, the children of Slovenian immigrants.  She left elementary school at the age of 12, to help support her family as a servant for $5/week.  When she was 13, she lied about her age so that she could work at the National Broom Factory for 75 cents a day, a job she held for 42 years.  Her younger siblings pitched in by picking up chunks of coal that had fallen onto the railroad tracks.  Brown's lone prized possession was her knee-length fine blonde hair.

Brown in the 1940s:

In 1943, Brown saw an advertisement in a newspaper, searching for women with blonde hair of at least 22" length, that had never been treated with chemicals or hot irons.  The military was offering to purchase such hair, to be used for meteorological instruments in the war effort.

The "meteorological instruments" were actually crosshairs for Norden bombsights.  The Army Air Forces (the predecessor to today's US Air Force) had tried various materials for the Norden bombsight, including black widow spider webbing, but nothing could withstand the temperature variations like fine blonde human hair that had never been treated with chemicals or heat.

A Norden bombsight and crosshairs:





Brown sent off a sample of her 34" blonde hair to the government for analysis.  After analyzing her hair, they agreed to purchase it, offering to pay her in war savings stamps.  But Brown wouldn't accept payment for her hair.  She saw it as her patriotic duty to help the war effort.  She later recalled that she cried for months after cutting her hair.

It was decades before Brown learned the true use of her hair, and the effect of her sacrifice.  In 1987, on her 80th birthday, she received a personal thank-you letter from President Ronald Reagan:



Brown's hometown of Pueblo, Colorado declared an official Mary Babnik Brown day, and she also received an award from the Colorado Aviation Historical Society.

Said Brown: "Here I am, an old lady of 83, and I'm still flying high".