About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Right-wing "cannot wait" for gov't shutdown, "just like in '95 and '96"

August 31, 2010 11:44 am ET — 25 Comments

The right-wing media is "giddy" over the possibility of winning a Republican majority in Congress in order to shut down the government. The shutdowns cost the government at least $800 million, furloughed over a million workers, delayed veterans benefits, shut down federally funded research, and suspended certain law enforcement activities, among other things. 

The 1995-1996 gov't shutdowns had massive impact on public and cost the government at least $800 million

Federal government shutdowns occur when Congress cannot agree to pass a federal budget.  According to a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, Federal government shutdowns occur for the following reasons:

Shutdowns of the federal government have occurred in the past due to failures to pass regular appropriations bills by the October 1 deadline; lack of an agreement on stopgap funding for federal government operations through a continuing resolution; and other impasses, for example, in 1995, the lack of an agreement on lifting the federal debt ceiling.

Then-speaker Gingrich was criticized for orchestrating two government shutdowns in FY 1996, which cost the government at least $800 million.  Between November 1995 and January 1996, two federal government shutdowns occurred. As Time reported:

As the clocks struck midnight on Nov. 14, 1995, so began the longest federal government shutdown in U.S. history. For 21 days -- from Nov. 14-19 and again from Dec. 16, 1995-Jan. 6, 1996 -- nonessential government employees stayed home while their leaders fought to pass a federal budget. The shutdown was sparked when an agreement between President Bill Clinton and the Republican-controlled Congress (led by then Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich) could not be reached by Sept. 30, the expiration date of the previous year's budget. In the end, the shutdown, which cost the government $800 million in losses for salaries paid to furloughed employees, was settled when Clinton submitted a budget that proposed to eliminate the federal deficit in seven years.

Delay: Gingrich "told a room full of reporters that he forced the shutdown because Clinton had rudely made him...sit at the back of Air Force One." In his book No Retreat, No Surrender: One American's Fight, Tom Delay, who was the Republican House Whip at the time of the shutdown, wrote:

Negotiations spiraled downward, and after Clinton vetoed a stopgap spending bill, funding for government services ran out, and a shutdown began on November 13, 1995. Not long after, Gingrich made the mistake of his life. He told a room full of reporters that he forced the shutdown because Clinton had rudely made him and Bob Dole sit at the back of Air Force One and exit from the rear on a flight to the funeral of assassinated Israeli prime minister [sic] Yitzak Rabin. It was pitiful. The New York Daily News carried the headline "Cry Baby" above a drawing of Newt as a screaming baby in diapers. The Democrats even tried to take a blowup of the cover onto the floor of the House.

The Hill also reported that Gingrich orchestrated the shutdown after President Bill Clinton made him and Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.) sit at the back of Air Force One on a trip:

Gingrich received heavy criticism for helping to engineer the shutdown after it was reported he said that it was partially a result of Clinton's making former Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.) and him sit at the back of Air Force One.

Over 1 million federal employees were furloughed.  According to the CRS report, over 1 million federal employees were furloughed as a result of the 1995-1996 government shutdown: 

The most recent shutdowns occurred in FY1996. There were two during the early part of the fiscal year. The first, November 14-19, 1995, resulted in the furlough of an estimated 800,000 federal employees. It was caused by the expiration of a continuing funding resolution (P.L. 104-31) agreed to on September 30, 1995, and by President Clinton's veto of a second continuing resolution and a debt limit extension bill.

The second FY1996 partial shutdown of the federal government, and the longest in history, began on December 16, 1995, and ended on January 6, 1996, after the White House and Congress agreed on a new resolution (P.L. 104-94) to fund the government through January 26, 1996. On January 2, 1996, the estimate of furloughed federal employees was 284,000.8 Another 475,000 federal employees, rated "essential," continued to work in a non-pay status. The shutdown was triggered by the expiration of a continuing funding resolution enacted on November 20 (P.L. 104-56), which funded the government through December 15, 1995. There were several short-term continuing resolutions between January 6, 1996, and April 26, 1996, when P.L. 104-134 was enacted to fund any agencies or programs not yet funded through FY1996.

Time: Shutdown "cost the government $800 million in losses for salaries paid to furloughed employees." Time reported that the "the shutdown was sparked when an agreement between President Bill Clinton and the Republican-controlled Congress (led by then Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich) could not be reached by Sept. 30, the expiration date of the previous year's budget. In the end, the shutdown, which cost the government $800 million in losses for salaries paid to furloughed employees, was settled when Clinton submitted a budget that proposed to eliminate the federal deficit in seven years."

 American veterans received "major curtailment in services," including health services.  The CRS reported that American veterans received "[m]ajor curtailment in services, ranging from health and welfare to finance and travel."

Health research, toxic waste clean-up were shut down.  The CRS reported that, according to "congressional hearings, press and agency accounts," new patients were not admitted to NIH:

New patients were not accepted into clinical research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical Center; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ceased disease surveillance (information about the spread of diseases, such as AIDS and flu, were unavailable); hotline calls to NIH concerning diseases were not answered; and toxic waste clean-up work at 609 sites stopped, resulting in 2,400 "Superfund" workers being sent home.

Hiring of 400 border patrol agents was suspended.  The CRS report showed that law enforcement services were suspended, including hiring 400 border patrol agents.

Delays occurred in the processing of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives applications by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms; work on more than 3,500 bankruptcy cases was suspended; cancellation of the recruitment and testing of federal law-enforcement officials occurred, including the hiring of 400 border patrol agents; and delinquent child-support cases were suspended.

200,000 U.S. visa/passport applications went unprocessed; tourist industries suffered millions of dollars in losses.  The CRS reported that:

20,000-30,000 applications by foreigners for visas went unprocessed each day; 200,000 U.S. applications for passports went unprocessed; and U.S. tourist industries and airlines sustained millions of dollars in losses. 

Parks/Museums/Monuments closed costing $14.2 million per day in tourism revenue. The CRS reported an estimated loss of $14.2 million per day in local communities near the national parks, museums, and monuments due to the shutdown:

Closure of 368 National Park Service sites (loss of 7 million visitors) occurred, with local communities near national parks losing an estimated $14.2 million per day in tourism revenues; and closure of national museums and monuments (estimated loss of 2 million visitors) occurred.

Nonetheless, right-wing media "giddy" for a similar shutdown

Erickson: "I'm almost giddy thinking about a government shutdown next year. I cannot wait!"  Via Twitter, Erick Erickson proclaimed:

Erickson tweet 1

In response to criticism over this statement, Erickson replied:

Erickson tweet 2

Morris: "There's going to be a government shutdown just like in '95 and '96, but we're going to win it this time."  On August 27, Fox News correspondent Dick Morris gave a speech at the Americans for Prosperity Foundation's Defending the Dream Conference, saying: "There's going to be a government shutdown just like in '95 and '96, but we're going to win it this time." 

So, it's going to be same time next year, guys and women. Same time next year. We're going to be back here and we're going to be pressuring the people who we helped elect to oppose big spending and we will be telling them you do not tread on us. Now, there's going to be a government shutdown just like in '95 and '96, but we're going to win it this time, and I'll be fighting on your side.

Gingrich using his old 1995 game plan to shape new GOP strategy: Take back Congress, "refuse to fund," and force Obama to respond.  In April 13 article, The Hill reported on Gingrich's comments encouraging the GOP to cause a government shutdown over health care reform:

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) said Tuesday that a government shutdown could occur should Republicans attempt to strip funding for the new healthcare law next Congress.

[...]

"A simple majority can refuse to fund. So, if you have Boehner as speaker and Mitch McConnell as majority leader, all you have to do is not write into the appropriations bill the money," Gingrich said at a breakfast sponsored by The American Spectator and Americans for Tax Reform. "If the president vetoes the appropriations bills, you repass them.

"The president has got to make it into a positive political issue to veto the appropriations bills. Remember, the only person who can close the government is the president. If you're prepared to pass the appropriations bills, he has to decide to veto a bill you have passed. And so you simply pass a bill."   

[...]

"You have to consistently communicate key messages because the presidency is such a powerful instrument," he said. "I think this city has fundamentally misunderstood what happened with the shutdown. To most of the country, it became a signal that we were serious...If we win we have every right to say 'the American people have spoken."

Asked if he would encourage the Republicans to push for a shutdown, Gingrich said that the GOP needs to be ready to stand on principle.

"It's especially important that they keep their word to the American people," he told The Hill. "[They] can't be intimidated...you have to believe what you believe in."

Dave Weigel reported that Gingrich similarly encouraged Republicans to send Obama a budget which refused to fund health care reform, and see if Obama "decide[s]...he's going to veto the bill" or not. From Wiegel's April 13 report:

At a luncheon at the Heritage Foundation -- his second meeting with conservative journalists and bloggers today -- Newt Gingrich expanded a bit on his argument, made most recently at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, that a new Republican Congress could roll back the Democrats' victory on health-care reform by refusing to fund it. I asked Gingrich how this would work, given the experience of Republicans in the winter of 1995 when a showdown over the budget forced a government shutdown.

"Wait a second," said Gingrich. "This is the standard, elite, inside-the-Beltway worldview. Tell me in what way we didn't win. After that, we got to a balanced budget. And what happened to the Republican majority?" The answer, of course, is that Republicans held the majority in 1996, while President Bill Clinton was reelected.

[...]

Gingrich, having argued that the 1995 shutdown was good for Republicans, argued that a potential battle over health care would be even better. "There's a new poll out this morning," said Gingrich, referring to a Rasmussen Reports study. "By 58 to 38, people want to repeal the health-care bill. It'll get worse as people learn more and as the failure of the bill becomes more obvious. So if you take that model, all the Republican Congress needs to say in January is, 'We won't fund it.' What the president needs to decide is: He's going to veto the bill. He needs to force a crisis on an issue that's a 58 to 38 issue. And it's going to get worse. It'll be 2 to 1 or better by the time we get down to the fight. Because this bill is terrible."

I followed up with Gingrich after the speech, largely to clarify how Clinton's reelection figured into this recollection of the shutdown. According to Gingrich, Clinton simply over-matched the Republicans in 1996 and skillfully made the speaker of the House his target. The ability of Republicans to hold onto Congress was impressiveness nonetheless. "I always look back on the budget fight as the moment our base decided we were real, that we weren't just politicians," said Gingrich. "I believe -- and John Kasich and Bob Livingston agree with me -- if we had backed off, we never would have gotten to a balanced budget."

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Jen7 (August 31, 2010 11:54 am ET)
      14  
      This needs to be the Dem's talking point on all the shows. Republicans don't want to do ANYTHING if they get back control.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by ScienceBuff (August 31, 2010 12:00 pm ET)
        8 1
        Well, they do want to launch witch hunts.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by dkylep (August 31, 2010 12:07 pm ET)
        10 3
        It simply won't matter Jen7. You have Gingrich ADMITTING that he caused the shutdown because of personal reasons like sitting at the back of an airplane, yet they still kept a majority. Still, even after what is one of the most egregious breaches of public trust that a representative can have (putting personal desires and needs ahead of his/her electorate), at least theoretically (because we all know that such happens all the time. It's just usually never caught on such a major issue).

        Your political system is a joke. The Republicans and the Democrats. Two sides of the exact same coin. They'll squabble like little children when the Republicans win their majority (and they will win one, have no fear. The racists and bigots have been riled up, and they'll be voting come November, if only to try and get the black man in the White House out come two years from now) and pretend that they're actually fighting for Americans. And Americans will believe them. All the while, businesses and banks will continue raping and pillaging your economy, secure in the knowledge that whoever is in power, they will bow down before the almighty lobbyists.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by pongotwistleton (August 31, 2010 1:49 pm ET)
          2 7
          Your political system is a joke.

          You're an idiot. Our political system is defined by our Constitution, which encompasses a system of "checks and balances" and separation of powers among our 3 branches of gov't. What political system prevails where you live? And what political system is better?

          For someone who speaks as an outsider, it's curious that you're so in tune with what moves the U.S. electorate to vote the way they do. I'm sure it's your years of familiarity with the voters in traditionally republican districts -- like delaware or montgomery county PA, among the scores of other places -- that convinces you they're racists and bigots, Right?

          The broad generalizations you make expose you, not the voters, as a bigoted twit.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by grmce (August 31, 2010 5:46 pm ET)
            5  
            Our political system is defined by our Constitution, which encompasses a system of "checks and balances"
            Unfortunately it consists more of checks than balances. The disconnect (as opposed to separation) between your legislative and executive branches (not to mention a politicised judiciary) has created a legislative nightmare that makes the U.S. most dysfunctional as a political entity.

            Where minimising voter participation has been a standard electoral strategy, where blockage of legislation (including supply) is talked of as a standard procedure for a group ideologically opposed to the Executive, one can only surmise that "the system is broke". This is not surprising in that it was devised more than 2 centuries ago in reaction to a hang over from the era of absolute monarchy - an unchecked executive.

            Until the U.S. citizenry rids itself of the delusion that its system of government is perfect and that they have nothing to learn from other nations, they will continue to slide down the track of dysfunction as the rest of the world alternates between laughter and sadness at a noble experiment brought down by hubris - very Shakespearian.

            And yes I do know a lot about parliamentary systems, both from personal experience where I live, in Australia, and through comparative study of parliamentary and electoral systems around the world. One thing I learnt early on in the piece is that no one has a monopoly on good ideas and nobody has a monopoly on bad ideas.

            If the U.S. citizenry were to get its collective head out of its collective backside and learn from the rest of the world (both the positive and negative examples) and listen to its own citizens who have international reputations in their fields instead of folksy soothsayers who pander to their every prejudice, they might have a chance. Otherwise they will continue down the path begun by Great Britain following the 2nd Boer War - a not so genteel decline in international influence and standing.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by roundhouse (August 31, 2010 2:07 pm ET)
          6 4
          That's pretty skeptical but fairly accurate.

          It's no longer we the people, it's we the lobbyists who call the shots in our democracy. And for too many elected Democrats, there's just a hair's width difference between themselves and the conservative corporatist Republicans.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by roundhouse (August 31, 2010 2:39 pm ET)
            6 2
            Here, for whoever gave me a thumbs down, I'll give myself one too because I think too many of our Democrats are corporate hoes.

            Idiot.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by southerngal (August 31, 2010 2:50 pm ET)
              2 5
              So maybe you and I should start our own political party. : /
              As we both are disenfranchised by the entrenched power grubbing political parties today.

              We may be on opposite ends and disagree over probably everything, but I would rather be hashing it out with adults who aren't afraid to take a stand, aren't afraid of their own positions, aren't poll driven, aren't scared to be blunt and honest - and don't pander and treat us like children who will bolt for the other candidate if we are told something we don't want to hear.

              Let me know when you come up with a name :)
              Report Abuse
    • Author by historygeek001 (August 31, 2010 12:14 pm ET)
      4  
      C'mon, wingnuts--defend this. Try defending it by using actual facts, not talking points. I really want to see what you'll say.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by terrapin53 (August 31, 2010 12:17 pm ET)
      8  
      What good does a balanced budget do when the next Republican president and congress then double the national debt the next decade. Huh Newt? Does no good and as a federal empoyee I remember those shutdowns all to well, and to want them again is total crap.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wookie (August 31, 2010 12:48 pm ET)
      6 1
      The shutdowns cost the government at least $800 million, furloughed over a million workers, delayed veterans benefits, shut down federally funded research, and suspended certain law enforcement activities, among other things.


      Yeah, but it was $800 million spent on not actually doing anything so it was all worthwhile...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wesley (August 31, 2010 1:39 pm ET)
      1 11
      The reason the government shut down in 1995?

      Pres. Clinton vetoed the spending bill that had been passed by congress.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by roundhouse (August 31, 2010 2:15 pm ET)
        7  
        And that's supposed to make you Republicans look less like the buncha sore losers that you are?

        You're hilarious.

        Written in any fictional characters on your voting ballot recently, Wes?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by raddave43 (August 31, 2010 4:39 pm ET)
        3  
        Pres. Clinton didn't veto the budget for FY 96 when the government shut down. The Budget hadn't passed the HOR and Senate at the end of the FY.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by wesley (August 31, 2010 5:09 pm ET)
            5
          -- I vetoed the spending bill sent to me by Congress last night -- Pres. Clinton

          Clinton didn't like the spending bill passed by the GOP led congress and he vetoed it.

          No veto...no shutdown.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Unreality (August 31, 2010 7:19 pm ET)
            7  
            Wesley,
            This is too easy. Wikipedia has a pretty succinct description told by Clinton and DeLay - who agreed on the facts! In short, it's not opinion, it's a fact that it had NOTHING to do with the budget, it was all ego.

            It was a game of chicken to see who would fold first. Gringrich, who was the "brains" of the strategy along with Dick Armey (yes the same guy behind today's astroturf AFP) and Dole wanted additional cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, education, environmental controls, and the Earned Income Tax Credits. Clinton thought those cuts were unnecessary to balance the budget. The difference in opinion resulted from differing estimates of economic growth, medical inflation, and anticipated revenues.

            Clinton wrote:
            Armey replied gruffly that if I didn't give in to them, they would shut the government down and my presidency would be over. I shot back, saying I would never allow their budget to become law, "even if I drop to 5 percent in the polls. If you want your budget, you'll have to get someone else to sit in this chair!" Not surprisingly, we didn't make a deal.

            But wait, it gets better. Tom DeLay wrote:
            "He [Gingrich] told a room full of reporters that he forced the shutdown because Clinton had rudely made him and Bob Dole sit at the back of Air Force One...Newt had been careless to say such a thing, and now the whole moral tone of the shutdown had been lost. What had been a noble battle for fiscal sanity began to look like the tirade of a spoiled child. The revolution, I can tell you, was never the same."
            These are the folks you want back in charge of our government? These are the people who will restore honor?
            Report Abuse
          • Author by roundhouse (September 01, 2010 1:25 pm ET)
            2  
            You're still the same old dishonest punk prone to selective understanding of the issues you've always been, Wes. In short, a typical rightwing Republican apologist.

            Why not give the full quote punk?
            I vetoed the spending bill sent to me by Congress last night because America can never accept under pressure what it would not accept in free and open debate. I strongly believe their budget plan is bad for America. I believe it will undermine opportunity, make it harder for families to do the work that they have to do, weaken our obligations to our parents and our children, and make our country more divided. So I will continue to fight for the right kind of balanced budget.

            Report Abuse
    • Author by roundhouse (August 31, 2010 2:02 pm ET)
      6  
      Of course, they're giddy. They're f**kin' idiots so bent on having power that they don't give a dam* who they hurt to get it.

      Morons.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Unreality (August 31, 2010 6:56 pm ET)
      5  
      Oh, do I remember the shutdown. I swore that if I ever met Gingrich in person I'd be sure to remind him - and almost met him at a medical conference last year - still waiting to remind him. We had reservations to stay at a national park for the holidays - reservation that fill a year in advance. We'd missed out booking many years in a row, but this year we got in. It was my family's ONLY vacation that year due to my round-the-calendar tech startup demands.

      Without a federal budget the park was closed. No vacation. We stayed home. Had a terrible time. Oh yeah, we remember.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by n'est-ce pas (August 31, 2010 9:27 pm ET)
        3  
        I was active and deployed military at the time. Betcha my piece of mind would "remind" Gingrich more than yours would. You can watch the door while I school him.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Unreality (September 01, 2010 2:36 am ET)
          3  
          OK, you go first.
          My kid was ticked off that we couldn't go to Yosemite and see Santa Claus pull up in a horse drawn sleigh.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by n'est-ce pas (September 01, 2010 8:57 pm ET)
            1  
            Your kid was right to be ticked off. Seeing Santa Clause at Yosemite would be a fairly spectacular sight.... I think your kid goes first.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Unreality (September 01, 2010 11:13 pm ET)
              2  
              The shutdown had absolutely no benefit for the nation, and was merely political posturing to boost Newt's ego. It would have been better for the country to get Newt laid and let the rest of us enjoy our holidays. We citizens were merely collateral damage.
              Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.