The U.S. government shut down on October 1, a drastic action that impacted millions of Americans. A governmental shutdown means that the politicians in the Senate and House of Representatives were unable to reach a spending agreement, so the government had to initiate a contingency plan. A contingency plan allows the government to still function while not having funds.
Despite all of Congress supposedly representing one America, they seem to disagree on what America wants. They think more of the liberal or conservative America, and represent their parties more than their districts. When ranking officials, the senators and congressmen are sworn to an oath to the people of the United States, yet they are too scared of angering their own party to sign a bill that gives crucial funding to their states.
Since the government couldn’t agree on a budget, the politicians tried to pass a continuing resolution (CR), which allows the government to still function until it can pass an actual budget. This CR passed the House, but ended up technically failing the Senate due to some technicalities in the rules.
Some Democrats’ (and a few Republicans) main goal is to vote against the budget proposal and CR to anger Republicans and President Donald Trump. Most of the adversaries don’t have a clear alternative to the bill—they just want to make sure that their political opponents aren’t happy and appear like they are the ones who care about the people in their districts. In reality, what most politicians really care about is making themselves look tough. They eventually will suck it up and sign on the original bill, and the only change that will be made is that they will have inconvenienced millions of people for a slogan on their re-election campaigns.
The shutdown would be one thing if the politicians actually wanted to change the spending limit, but they haven’t had any conversations. They don’t actually care about the substance of the bill. This is just those voting against this particular bill. This happens frequently: politicians vote no on a bill, then, after appearing like they stood up to the majority party, vote yes because they don’t want to take a stand.
It looks good when they’re running for office. They stood up to the president, to the speaker of the house, and ultimately, they got an extra one or two million dollars for something that affects their state in some way. After delaying social security, not paying workers, and limiting public healthcare for weeks, the politicians seem happy that they got an extra million that will benefit 200 people while inconveniencing two million.
There are times when the politicians should vote no on bills. It shouldn’t just be under the control of the president and majority party because that’s not how the Constitution was written. It’s important that when the politicians vote no, they have a specific reason, not just that they don’t like the senator or congressman who introduced it. The importance of their vote matters because they don’t just represent themselves or their party—they represent their districts or states.
Partisan politics have become increasingly normalized recently, isolating people at all times and not providing a “middle ground” for voters. It’s seen as normal for politicians to prioritize their parties more than the people they are sent to represent. Politicians in Washington just need to learn to work together.
