Should it just be illegal for Congress to shut the government down?

• Z

  Zara6h ago

  Hot take that will get me roasted: a clean ban on shutdowns is unconstitutional and anyone seriously proposing it either hasn't read Article I or is hoping you haven't. Congress's power of the purse is not a policy preference, it's structural. You can change the rules of the game but you cannot legislate away the legislative branch's core function without a constitutional amendment. Fight me.

  261Reply
• K

  Kofi10h ago

  The "last real check on spending" argument only works if shutdowns actually stopped spending, which they demonstrably have not. If your brake only works when you crash the car into a school bus, it's not a brake, it's just a car crash. Someone explain how you square that with thirty years of deficit data.

  212Reply
• T

  Theo11h ago

  Okay but removing the shutdown threat doesn't "fix" spending, it just removes the one moment where legislators are forced to actually sit in a room and negotiate face to face. You want a spending machine with no brakes at all? Be careful what you wish for.

  187Reply
• R

  Riley5h ago

  I'm 24. I am being told that the reason 2 million people don't get paid is so that politicians can have leverage in an argument about money that they will ultimately resolve exactly the way the politics of the moment dictate regardless. I was told this system was designed by geniuses. I am skeptical.

  113Reply
• A

  Avery12h ago

  I'm a federal employee and I have been through four shutdowns now. I have a mortgage. I have two kids. The idea that my family's financial stability is a "negotiating tool" for people who still get paid during the shutdown is not a quirk of the system — it is a moral obscenity.

  94Reply
• I

  Iris3h ago

  Federal contractor here and this conversation keeps forgetting us. Employees at least get back pay eventually. Contractors get nothing. Ever. I lost $14,000 in billable hours during the last one and there is no legal mechanism for recovery. We are not in the headline but we are absolutely in the damage.

  88Reply
• YS

  Yuki S.8h ago

  To the appropriations staffer above — I don't doubt your experience but "the negotiating happens on the same schedule anyway" is doing a lot of work there. The 2023 shutdown fight absolutely changed the final numbers on discretionary caps. You can argue about whether that's good or bad but saying the threat has zero effect seems like revisionism.

  71Reply
• K

  Kofi10h ago

  I changed my mind on this. Used to think shutdowns were a necessary evil. Then my sister lost her apartment during the 2019 one because OPM delayed her back pay for six weeks and her landlord wouldn't wait. You can have my "necessary evil" argument. I don't want it anymore.

  57Reply
• KK

  Kofi K.2h ago

  What kills me is that the people loudest about shutdowns being a necessary tool are always people whose paychecks clear no matter what happens. Senators. Lobbyists. Commentators. Funny how the indispensable mechanism always seems indispensable to the people insulated from its costs.

  52Reply
• R

  Ravi1h ago

  I'll say it clearly: no democratic peer of ours allows its government to simply stop functioning because the legislature didn't finish its homework on time. Not Canada, not Germany, not the UK, not Australia. We treat this like it's the price of freedom. They treat it like the embarrassment it is. We should feel embarrassed.

  47Reply
• K

  Kofi6h ago

  Nobody is proposing removing Congress's power of the purse, they're proposing a default funding rule when Congress fails to act. That is categorically different. The power of the purse requires actually using the purse, not threatening to torch it.

  44Reply
• D9

  Drew 928h ago

  Nobody is talking about the actual proposal here which would fund at the previous year's rate with a small automatic reduction each month to create pressure to deal. That's actually kind of clever? It keeps the pressure without the hostage dynamic. I'm not saying I love it but it's more nuanced than "shutdowns are banned."

  42Reply
• YS

  Yuki S.3h ago

  The real answer is that Congress should just do its job and pass a budget by October 1 the way the law already requires, which they have done exactly four times since 1977. Four. Times. Maybe start there before we redesign the whole system around the assumption of permanent failure.

  37Reply
• R

  Ravi9h ago

  Continuing resolutions and automatic funding sound great until you realize they permanently lock in whatever the last agreed budget was. That's not a neutral outcome. That just means whoever negotiated the last deal wins forever. This proposal has a thumb on the scale and nobody is talking about that.

  34Reply
• MM

  Maya M.6h ago

  To the person calling this unconstitutional — the House can set its own rules under Article I Section 5. A rule that triggers automatic CR is the House governing its own process. It's not a law removing Congressional authority, it's Congress choosing how to exercise it. That's not remotely the same thing and it's been done before.

  31Reply
• K

  Kofi4h ago

  The 24-year-old and the 67-year-old just summarized American governance better than any think piece I've read this year.

  29Reply
• K

  Kofi11h ago

  The person above is exactly right and the fact that Congress exempted themselves from the pay freeze during shutdowns tells you everything about who this system was designed to protect.

  23Reply
• C

  Casey2h ago

  "Just do your job" is not a policy. It's a frustrated uncle at Thanksgiving. I agree with the frustration but wishing for better behavior is not a structural fix.

  21Reply
• R

  Riley9h ago

  I've worked on appropriations staff for a decade — both sides — and the shutdown as leverage thing is genuinely a myth that both parties tell their base. In practice it creates chaos in agencies that have nothing to do with the fight, scrambles contract timelines for months after, and the actual negotiating happens on the same schedule it always would have. It's theater with real casualties.

  19Reply
• H

  Hana7h ago

  The automatic reduction idea is interesting until you remember that Republicans will just let it ride for years and call the annual cut a feature not a bug. "We defunded the EPA slowly through inaction" is not the budget process the founders had in mind.

  18Reply
• L

  Liam5h ago

  I am 67 and I've watched this exact debate cycle through about six times. Every generation discovers shutdowns are insane. Nothing changes. Best of luck to you.

  16Reply
• A

  Alex3h ago

  genuinely did not know contractors dont get back pay. thats actually insane and should be the headline of every single shutdown story.

  14Reply
• A

  Alex1h ago

  this applies to literally every political opinion anyone has about any policy that affects other people more than them but go off

  13Reply
• A

  Avery11h ago

  lol "last real check on spending" the deficit has gone up every single year regardless of whether there was a shutdown or not. great check, guys. really working.

  11Reply
• YS

  Yuki S.7h ago

  founders also didn't have a $33 trillion debt so maybe we should stop asking what they had in mind

  9Reply
• TL

  Theo L.10h ago

  same. my dad is a VA nurse and worked through 2018 without knowing when he'd see a check. he never missed a shift. the government missed every paycheck.

  8Reply
• L_

  Liam _x5h ago

  okay but a rule the House sets the House can also just waive, so what exactly is the guarantee here? rules without enforcement are suggestions.

  7Reply
• I

  Iris9h ago

  ^ this is actually the sharpest point in the thread and it's getting ignored

  6Reply
• C

  Casey4h ago

  cynicism is not analysis though. saying "nothing ever changes" is how nothing ever changes.

  5Reply
• J

  Jamie8h ago

  if its theater why does everyone always use it

  3Reply

More debates people can't stop arguing about