Shutdowns are fake, but government growth is very real

With a government funding deadline looming on March 14, the House passed a continuing resolution (CR) to freeze non-defense spending at Fiscal Year 2024 levels while boosting defense and border funding. Action on the “stopgap,” as these recurring measures are always called, moves to the Senate.

As always, federal spending will be cut—next time.

This so-called clean extension has sparked backlash on both sides. Some Republicans, like Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), opposed it for failing to cut spending, prompting Donald Trump to again label Massie a “grandstander.” Meanwhile, House Democrats claimed—despite today’s stratospheric spending levels—that domestic programs would be starved. Only one House Democrat voted “yea,” but the Senate knows the real score and seems unlikely to block the measure.

The real crisis isn’t these recurring shutdown standoffs; it’s Congress’s refusal—or, more aptly, its inability—to impose even the slightest discipline on a federal behemoth that has grown far beyond anything the Framers would recognize.

Even so-called discretionary spending—separate from entitlements like Social Security and Medicare—has become effectively automatic, with deficits inexcusably allowed to linger at COVID-era $2 trillion heights and the national debt swelling to $36 trillion.

One frustration for libertarians is that GOP rhetoric often makes it harder to make the case for cutting agencies and programs when the can that gets kicked down the road is finally picked up, as I discuss at Forbes.

There has been ample time for Republicans to make federal shutdowns something they insist upon as part of restoring power to states, localities, communities, and households. The GOP should be creating the conditions to embrace, not fear, federal shutdowns—but we’re nowhere close to that.

Instead, Republicans not only take for granted progressives’ great victories in custodial retirement and care programs, but even tend to defend unpopular institutions like the TSA when funding deadlines loom.

For example, in a Republican press conference just before Tuesday’s passage of the CR, Democrats were (not unfairly) accused of “using federal employees as props” and “using Medicaid benefits and Social Security checks as cudgels.” A sound GOP approach would prohibit enrolling oblivious newborns into these federal schemes, but actual, actionable cases for devolution and federalism—necessary for cutting both entitlement and discretionary spending—are rarely articulated.

Adding to the frustration, House Republicans yielded on spending, even as the administration and the Department of Government Efficiency announced 50 percent cuts at the Department of Education, massive USAID reductions, and more—all, in part, to trigger legal test cases.

Apart from such aggressive administrative actions—which will inevitably face court challenges—shutdowns and debt ceiling clashes may be the last remaining levers to force spending cuts.

Put another way: if Congress won’t act to reduce spending, perhaps not acting—allowing a shutdown to unfold, as has happened more than 20 times before—could serve to shrink the federal enterprise. A government that refuses to live within its means shouldn’t assume that more spending is the default. Besides, shutdowns are, to some extent, a myth—after all, taxes continue to be taken out of everyone’s paycheck.

Beyond spending, regulatory reform must also be part of any serious effort to downsize and streamline government. In recent months, proposals from the Republican Study Committee and House Budget Committee have emphasized pairing spending cuts with deregulation. Regulatory caps and sunsets could help restrain both red ink and red tape—two pillars of progressivism that persist only with Republican cooperation.

Shutdowns are disruptive, but fiscal collapse would be far worse. Perhaps the best libertarian outcome is simple: let inaction do the work of restraint. After all, the fact that we can shut down government without even passing a law is something profound. But more seriously—if genuine institutions of restraint actually exist in the second century of progressivism, we’re all ears.

For more:

“Will Congress Ever Take The Libertarian Win And Embrace Automatic Shutdown?” Forbes

“Libertarian Victory: You Mean We Can Shut Down Government Without Even Passing A Law?” Forbes

“Is The Debt Ceiling The Only Remaining Institution Capable Of Shrinking The Federal Government?” Forbes

“If The Government Shutdown Falls Short Of Armageddon, We Should Rethink The Other 75 Percent Too,” Forbes