Economy

Government shutdowns – uniquely American

By The World ⋅ April 8, 2011 ⋅ Post a comment
Play
Download

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

(Photo: Diliff)

Anchor Marco Werman speaks with Allen Schick, a professor of public policy at the University of Maryland, about why government shutdowns do not happen anywhere else other than US. Download MP3

 

 

 

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

 

MARCO WERMAN:  The possibility of a government shutdown here in the US got us thinking could this happen in some of the world’s other large democracies?  Allen Schick is a professor of public policy at the University of Maryland. Professor Schick, government shutdown, a purely American thing or could it happened anywhere?  Has it happened before?

ALLEN SCHICK:  Exclusively American but is distinctively American.  The reasons for that are two-fold.  First, in most of the large countries in the world democracies are parliamentary regimes and therefore the hostility of a breakdown of relations between executive and legislature diminished.   And when that happens [has happened recently in Portugal] the government falls.  And you look forward to new elections.  And the second reason is its fail to adopt a budget in almost every other country in the world and automatic procedure kicks in to continue the government in operation.  We don’t have that automatic procedure in the United States.

WERMAN:  In the case of Portugal where the government failed, did the kind of government checkbook got put up on the shelf as well?

SCHICK:  No, no, government continues because in parliamentary regimes they actually use a concept of government in two ways.  The government in terms of the governing parties that ruled the country and second in terms of the apparatus of government that keeps it going.  So, in the first sense the government falls the parties are no longer in power but in second sense the government continues.

WERMAN:  So, Portugal for example to continue that example is currently under a caretaker government until new elections can be held.  How much better is it to have no government than having one that’s closed?

SCHICK:  People don’t notice very much of the difference because so many aspects of government don’t involve the political level.  The failure to adopt the budget for example, for the parts of government in United States which will continue they won’t notice the difference the fact that we don’t have a budget.

WERMAN:  Does this create some argument for not having any government?

SCHICK:   No.  It does create an argument for having an automatic procedure so that the government doesn’t close shop in case it fails to appropriate the money.

WERMAN:  Tell us about the case of Japan where a shutdown was averted after a budget was passed.  I mean that’s slightly different from what we’re talking about the States and

SCHICK:  And in the [xx] the issue was a little different.  There are two issues that get pushed to the other. One is can government spend money –the other can government borrow money when it needs to borrow money in order to spend it.  So in Japan they have to fight in the Japanese parliament resolve [xx] to borrow money to flow the bonds.  And that might come up again in the few weeks in United States because running up against the debt limit. A debt limit is a limit on the amount of bonds that the United States can have outstanding.

WERMAN:  Now you do a lot of work with the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.  I mean, do your contacts there ask you a lot of questions about this looming government shutdown?  I mean after all it’s happened here in handful of times.

SCHICK:  They don’t ask questions.  They’re bemused by it.

WERMAN:  Bemused.

SCHICK:  I hate to say this but they often couple it with a sense that the United States is on a downward spiral.  That it can’t lead the world economically if they can’t get their own economic house in order.

WERMAN:  Do you think that’s kind of an attitude that’s shared by a lot of people around the world.  I mean you hearing that you know the US is losing credibility with this potential government shutdown.

SCHICK:  There are two sentiments I have pick up.  One is the loss of credibility of leadership.    And the other is literally be [xx] around the world about how the United States operates.

WERMAN:  And so how do you explain it?

SCHICK:  I explained to them I say you got to understand the United States government was engineered more than twenty years ago not to work.   Because when we’ve wrote our Constitution we were scared of the concentration of power. And consequently we fragment the government and we’ve overcome that problem through our various ways—through  our affluence—through our industry—to the political party system but once in a while you get a breakdown because that’s the way the system operates.  [xx] a [xx]in school that separation of powers.  But if you think about it separation of power means that the two sides can fight until they no longer wanna fight.

WERMAN:  We’ve been speaking with Allen SCHICK of the University of Maryland school of Public Policy about how a government shutdown seems to be something that only happens in America. Professor Schick thanks very much for your time.

 

SCHICK:   Thank you very much.

 

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Discussion

3 comments for “Government shutdowns – uniquely American”

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/N4VQ5H56TDNVWG4CMLJLEAMOCA Dave

    The Separation of Powers was meant to be a check on extremes – NOT to create extremes. The worst part of this is that these failed political parties – both Republicans and Democrats – who were required to pass the budget back Oct. 1st, will continue to get their paychecks (their staffers, too!) – FOR FAILING IN THEIR JOB. As long as their are zero consequences for not doing their jobs, this will only get worse. From here forward it is critical that, if the President and Congress (and their staffs!) do NOT do their job and have an approved Budget by Oct. 1st each year, they all go without their paychecks until they pass one – and those lost paychecks cannot be made back. Without consequences, these irresponsible political parties will continue to push American down the path of national failure.

    • Anonymous

      Novel idea, but my impression is that most members of Congress are well-off enough otherwise that withholding their paycheck is not going to make a tremendouse impact on them with a few exceptions (the staffers are a different story, I’m sure). Consider also the difficulty of assessing whether an elected representative or senator succeeds or fails simply based on whether a budget is passed. In the eyes of the hardliners on both sides, they are succeeding for their constituencies by objecting on “principle” and refusing to compromise on their concerns.

      I found this story somewhat condescending in it’s “only in America” lament and the “embarassment” it causes us in the world. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, “Democracy is the worst form of government in the world, except for every other form of goverment.” Our vigourous public discourse can cut both ways, but I think over all it’s for the better.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FR35JIZ6I5BWIQMW6MBEMRPJGQ Devin

      Yeah, we like to point the finger, don’t we? It’s always “their” fault.

      A simple look at the numbers shows there are three major items busting the budget right now: defense spending where we spend as much as the rest of the world combined, health care spending that covers less than 20% of the population while spending more than most developed nations, and tax revenues at a post-WWII low. Yet any politician who dares to address those 3 problems won’t get elected. Indeed, we pretty much require politicians to promise to make two of those items worse (“cut taxes!” “protect our borders!”) as a condition of getting elected.

      We’ve got the government we deserve. When it collapses, we have nobody but ourselves to blame. It’s what we voted for.