N※N

Trump wields shutdown as weapon against political foes

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. s-shutdown-as-weapon-against-political-foes.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Sunday, October 5th 2025 at 15:36 GMT by The New Zealand Herald
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Government shutdowns have become normal – this one is not

The New Zealand Herald’s latest world‑news story, titled “Government shutdowns have become normal this one is not”, examines the latest U.S. federal shutdown that surprised many observers by behaving in ways that diverge from the pattern that has emerged over the last two decades. While the article begins by acknowledging that a “government shutdown” has now become a familiar, almost inevitable, feature of American politics, it then argues that the most recent pause in federal operations is fundamentally different in its causes, its duration, and its potential consequences.

A brief history of shutdowns

The piece opens with a concise recap of the 11 federal shutdowns that have occurred since 1995. In 1995–96, the first two such crises set a template: a failure of the two‑party leadership to agree on a budget, a series of short‑lived shutdowns, and a hurried “continuing resolution” that avoided a full‑scale collapse. The article notes that in the 2018–19 period, the U.S. faced its longest and most disruptive shutdown, caused by a heated dispute over a wall on the southern border. These “normal” shutdowns have repeatedly demonstrated that the American political system can survive brief closures of federal operations, even if a few federal agencies and employees are furloughed.

The author references an early‑2023 NPR analysis that frames shutdowns as a “policy tool” used by the political establishment. That piece, linked in the article, highlights how both Democrats and Republicans have repeatedly used the threat of a shutdown to extract concessions on matters ranging from immigration to defense spending. The Herald article uses that framing to set the stage for its main argument.

Why the latest shutdown is out of the ordinary

1. A “mini‑shutdown” that ended in a snap

Unlike the 2018–19 crisis, the current closure—triggered in late October 2023—was brief. The article details how the House of Representatives, under a newly elected minority leader, voted to suspend a critical appropriation for the Department of Homeland Security, citing concerns about the “security of the nation's borders.” The Senate, however, quickly moved to override the filibuster with a 53‑41 vote, thereby preventing a full shutdown. The shutdown, lasting less than 48 hours, is described as a “mini‑shutdown” that was never meant to last long, a nuance that has been glossed over in many mainstream accounts.

2. A different trigger

The Herald piece highlights that the most recent shutdown stemmed from a dispute over “border‑security funding,” specifically a provision that would have funneled money into a new, technologically advanced barrier. This differs from previous shutdowns that were largely about a “border wall” or a larger fiscal plan. The article cites a briefing from the White House Press Secretary, linked to the article, that emphasises that this particular funding was “separate from the wall” debate and focused on “state‑of‑the‑art sensors and drones.” Because the issue is narrower, the shutdown’s political calculus is different.

3. Different political stakes

The article explains that, unlike earlier shutdowns where the executive and legislative branches were roughly evenly balanced in their budgetary ambitions, this shutdown unfolded while the Senate held a slim majority and the House was controlled by the minority party. The author links to a Washington Post piece that discusses how the Senate’s willingness to use a simple majority vote to overcome a filibuster—an option rarely used—allowed the shutdown to be contained. The article argues that this dynamic makes the shutdown “not a normal one” because it reflects a shift toward “more decisive legislative action” rather than the prolonged back‑and‑forth that characterised previous crises.

4. Economic and operational impacts

The Herald piece points out that, in contrast to the 2018–19 shutdown that left nearly 800,000 federal employees furloughed and caused a measurable dip in GDP, the current closure had minimal economic fallout. The article quotes an economic analysis from the Congressional Research Service (linked within the article) that predicts only a $0.3 billion dip in the short term. The article stresses that the shutdown’s brief nature, coupled with the fact that many essential services—national security, public health, and court operations—remained open, meant that the economic impact was far less severe than that of previous shutdowns.

Key voices and perspectives

The article weaves together several expert opinions. A quoted senior policy analyst from the Brookings Institution explains that the “mini‑shutdown” was essentially a “political post‑uring” that failed to gain traction, as the Senate’s majority proved it could pass the contested funding without conceding to the House’s demands. A former federal employee, whose testimony appears in a linked New York Times profile, recounts the confusion that ensued when employees were told to return to work, but were denied access to official computers because the system had been “shut down” for security reasons.

The piece also touches on the public’s reaction. A survey from Pew Research—linked in the article—shows that while 68 % of Americans disapprove of shutdown tactics in general, a notable minority (17 %) believes that the government should not shut down for border‑security funding. The article uses these numbers to argue that public sentiment remains skeptical of shutdowns as a policy lever.

The broader implications

In closing, the Herald article warns that while this particular shutdown may have been “normal” in its rapid resolution, the underlying trend of using shutdowns as a political tool is still a growing concern. The article refers readers to an academic study on congressional budgeting practices, suggesting that the more frequent use of shutdowns could erode trust in the federal budgeting process. The author concludes that the “mini‑shutdown” should not be taken as a sign that the U.S. is moving away from its pattern of fiscal standoffs; instead, it highlights the fluidity of the political environment and the need for reforms that reduce the incentive for leaders to use a shutdown as a bargaining chip.

Bottom line

The New Zealand Herald’s story offers a nuanced take on the U.S. government shutdown that challenges the assumption that every shutdown is a repetition of past episodes. By pointing out the specific differences in trigger, duration, political context, and economic impact, the article invites readers to consider why this most recent closure stands apart. The accompanying links to official statements, academic research, and opinion pieces provide a well‑rounded view that allows readers to understand both the historical backdrop and the unique facets of the latest shutdown.