Adventurers Benefit From Government Slowdown

In the category of "What are they thinking?" the latest addition to my blogroll has some thoughts on the government shutdown slowdown.

When I saw this sign [regarding paying to hike the Red Rock trail] it started to dampen my mood.  I understand that the fees go to maintain the trails but I have always resented paying to experience nature.  My thoughts are, “really? I have to pay $5 to hike up the side of a mountain that will take me 20 minutes”.  The whole paying to be in nature just really gets under my skin, it seems wrong to me.  So decide to pay like the upstanding citizen I am (hehehe), when I notice this:

Thank you Government shutdown, you have officially saved me $5.  So it’s not all bad right? 

Why is the Department of Agriculture operating the toll for Red Rock trails?  Who can know the ways of the Fed?

Our adventurer is clearly having a good time.

Read the whole blog of a San Diego lad adventuring in Arizona.  He also reports that open carry is fairly common in his neck of the woods.

Federal Slowdown Affects Some Stuff You Might Care About

Well, we found one, besides my own personal work situation, where the federal slowdown (80% of federal spending continues) has an actual impact:

Mike Brenner is trying to open a craft brewery in Milwaukee by December. His application to include a tasting room is now on hold, as are his plans to file paperwork for four labels over the next few weeks. He expects to lose about $8,000 for every month his opening is delayed.

Why would you obey the law when there is no one to enforce it?  Well, this the federal government and apparently there is money to pay people to enforce the shutdown.  

For many hours her tour group, which included senior citizen visitors from Japan, Australia, Canada, and the United States, were locked in a Yellowstone National Park hotel under armed guard.

Really?  Elderly tourist driving through the wide open spaces in Yellowstone, as in "Where the Buffalo Roam," are met by armed resistance from our supposedly "broke" federal government?

Don't eat that grass or you'll be arrested. Yellowstone's shut down don't you know?

Onion headline? Buffalo Die in Yellowstone Due to Federal ShutDown.  Told they couldn't graze due to federal shutdown slowdown.

Personal Impacts of Government Shutdown

Some of you may know that I have spent almost my entire adult life working for the federal government.  I was active duty military for over twenty years and now I work for the feds in a research facility.  I am not complaining about the shutdown, but wanted to make clear to some people that I am not a disinterested party.  I took some heat on Twitter by retweeting that people should be embarassed about being worried about the shut down.  While that was certainly a bit of hyperbole, calling the tweet disgusting falls into the same category.

I am in an exempt category of employee so I am not out of work and am thankful for that.  But certainly, there are others on whom I depend for decisions and approvals who are gone and we can't make forward progress on joint projects.  On the personal front, both my wife and I can't get primary care medical appointments right now.  If the furlough goes on long enough, I suppose that a small veteran's benefit payment I receive might be interrupted.  At some point, I would also be furloughed, but that won't be for a while.  This is not overwhelming, but the impacts are real.  I tell you this to show that I am not a disinterested party.

But regardless, I support the idea that ordinary Americans deserve the same breaks from the Affordable Care Act that the administration has given their Big Business and Big Labor cronies.  This administration is exhibit A for the train wreck produced by crony capitalism.  The ACA is unmanageable and failing, and only by granting huge exemptions will health care insurance not be totally wrecked.  Boehner's current approach is sound and is in fact what I have advocated all along with spending bills.  Thin slice spending to make small cuts and only pass the programs you want.  Tie changes you desire to the spending the President and his party desires.  This is the historical prerogative of the House.  Each time the House offers a bill to fund a popular program, the Reid and Obama game plan is undermined.  I hope Boehner stays the course on this and dials up the heat.  I don't read the poll numbers on this; but my sense is that the Democrats have overplayed their hand. Spending money to shut down monuments and take down web sites is not playing with the public.  Eventually Democrat senators will feel the heat.

Photo courtesy of The Weekly Standard

Impact of Government Shutdown - As Little as 16% Affected

The actual impact of a government shutdown is much less than anyone might think.  Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid checks continue to get cut and the active duty military continues to perform their duties.  Furthermore, a significant portion of the defense civilian establishment in the form of the working capital funded activities continue operations.  Here is a breakdown of the budget.

Sorry for the extra large size, but its necessary to make my point.  Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid continue under a shutdown, totaling 41% of the budget.  The House has funded Defense separately, so we are up to 60% of the federal budget.  Interest on the debt has no direct, immediate impact, and accounts for 6%.  Finally, USA Today reports that:

Federal agencies have prepared plans to continue programs they deem critical to maintaining public safety and protecting property despite the shutdown. Employees who perform those critical functions will continue to work and get paid.

I believe that accounts for the 18% other mandatory programs, but have not been able to confirm.  However, essential functions account for a full 59% of non-defense workers.  Too bad that the NSA gang probably keeps coming to work.  All in all, I see about 78% of the federal budget having no impact during a shut down, and maybe even 84% if you don't care about interest on the debt.

In short, almost nothing that the American public actually cares about will be impacted by a #governmentshutdown.  The White House will make a big show of shutting White House down tours, but will be hard pressed to make the case.  The Democrats will of course be aided by a complicit media in puffing up a story about the impacts, but Republicans need to just hold the line and wait for no one to notice.

Boehner has done a reasonable job by sending over a clean continuing resolution that funds defense and bundling the rest of the budget with an ACA delay.

Government Shut Down?

If there was any doubt that the tenor of the discussion in Washington regarding the budget and spending has changed, consider this:

The potential difficulty of their job became clear after Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., following an evening meeting with Senate Democrats, said negotiators had effectively settled on $33 billion in reductions from current spending, a substantial difference from the $61 billion endorsed by the House in February.

By keeping the pressure on, and not bowing to threats of taking the blame over a potential shut down, Speaker Boehner is making the progress needed. Further, he is positioning himself for next year's budget battle by learning what tactics are working. The negotiations currently in progress only affect the fiscal year that ends on September 30, so a much bigger fight looms over fiscal year 2012 spending.

Meanwhile, you know you are making the right enemies when Chuckie Schumer is conspiring against you.

Speaking to several Democratic colleagues Tuesday, Sen. Charles Schumer, the third-ranking Democrat in the Senate, said they should all use the word "extreme" when describing the budget cuts that Tea Party Republicans were seeking in the ongoing budget negotiations.

However, what is actually extreme is the unprecedented peacetime deficit racked up by this administration. Congratulations Tea Party.

Also, is there any better evidence that removing earmarks from the process has made it easier to get budget reductions? Since the House imposed an earmarks ban, the debate has only been about the size of the cuts, not a peep about raising spending. John Hitchcock explains why in the comments on a previous article. I do not recall in my lifetime such spirited debate about how much to cut government spending. I realize that spending has risen out of control in the first place, but the tenor of the discussion is heartening.

With regards to a government shut down, I don't think it will happen, because both sides are too uncertain about the outcome. Its like a game of high stakes poker, where shutting down the government is the equivalent of calling all in on two pair but your opponent is betting like he has a decent hand. You might win, but is it the smart move?