When existing spending authority expires on March 4, the “non-essential” parts of the federal government will shut down unless Republicans and Democrats reach an agreement. This is causing lots of agitation in Washington, both by Democrats who don’t want the money spigots in the off position and Republicans who fret that they will be blamed for (gasp) gridlock.
I have a new piece at National Review that explains how the GOP can win this fight. Indeed, I explain that Republicans actually did a pretty good job during the 1995 fight, even though they now have negative memories of the experience. This excerpt provides my basic assessment, but the full article has lots of additional information, including quotes from news accounts in 1995 showing that the GOP held the upper hand, as well as four specific recommendation of how advocates of limited government can do even better this year.
With the GOP-led House and the Democratic Senate and White House far apart on a measure to pay the federal government’s bills past March 4, Washington is rumbling toward a repeat of the 1995 government-shutdown fight (actually two shutdown fights, one in mid-November of that year and the other in mid-December). This makes some Republicans nervous. They think Bill Clinton “won” the blame game that year, and they’re afraid they will get the short end of the stick if there is a 1995-type impasse this year. A timid approach, though, is a recipe for failure. It means that President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can sit on their hands, make zero concessions, and wait for the GOP to surrender any time a deadline approaches. In other words, budget hawks in the House have no choice. They have to fight. But they can take comfort in the fact that this is not a suicide mission. The conventional wisdom about what happened in November of 1995 is very misleading. Republicans certainly did not suffer at the polls. They lost only nine House seats, a relatively trivial number after a net gain of 54 in 1994. They actually added to their majority in the Senate, picking up two seats in the 1996 cycle. More important, they succeeded in dramatically reducing the growth of federal spending. They did not get everything they wanted, to be sure, but government spending grew by just 2.9 percent during the first four years of GOP control, helping to turn a $164 billion deficit in 1995 into a $126 billion surplus in 1999. And they enacted a big tax cut in 1997. If that’s what happens when Republicans are defeated, I hope the GOP loses again this year.
[…] cared a lot about the 1995-96 shutdown and the 2013 shutdown because those were battles involving the size and scope of […]
[…] cared a lot about the 1995-96 shutdown and the 2013 shutdown because those were battles involving the size and scope of […]
[…] cared a lot about the 1995-96 shutdown and the 2013 shutdown because those were battles involving the size and scope of […]
[…] is a big reason why, as we saw during the Clinton years, it’s Democrats who begin to cave so long as Republicans don’t preemptively […]
[…] I wrote a day-by-day analysis of new reports during the big shutdown fight that took place in the Clinton years and showed that there was no downside for Republicans. […]
[…] wrote a day-by-day analysis of new reports during the big shutdown fight that took place in the Clinton years and showed that […]
[…] wrote a day-by-day analysis of new reports during the big shutdown fight that took place in the Clinton years and showed that […]
[…] retained control of the House and Senate after their shutdown fight with Bill Clinton, and even picked up two Senate seats in […]
[…] that they won a landslide election in 2014 after the 2013 shutdown (and also prevailed after the 1995 shutdown fight), this skittishness is a bit of a mystery, but the conventional […]
[…] A look back at a past government debt ceiling debate that gave us the sequester — https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/can-the-gop-win-the-government-shutdown-fight/ […]
[…] soutien principal du non-financement de l’Obamacare). En effet, il est intéressant de noter que les républicains du Congrès ont très bien réussi lors des élections de 1996, même si la sagesse populaire prédisait qu’ils souffriraient en raison de la lutte du shutdown […]
[…] will generate good results for the Cruz-type lawmakers. Indeed, it’s worth noting that congressional Republicans did very well in the 1996 elections, even though conventional wisdom said they would suffer as a result of the 1995-96 shutdown […]
[…] won a policy victory as a result of the 1995 shutdown fight and they at least fought to a draw in the 1996 […]
[…] won a policy victory as a result of the 1995 shutdown fight and they at least fought to a draw in the 1996 […]
[…] Which is a shame, because when they had more unity during the 1995 shutdown fight, they won a very important victory. Here’s what I wrote about that battle. […]
[…] The “political risks” of a shutdown fight or a debt limit fight are greatly overblown. As I explained in an article for National Review back in 2011, Republicans achieved a policy victory and – at worst – a political draw in the big shutdown […]
[…] “political risks” of a shutdown fight or a debt limit fight are greatly overblown. As I explained in an article for National Review back in 2011, Republicans achieved a policy victory and – at worst – a political draw in the big […]
[…] “political risks” of a shutdown fight or a debt limit fight are greatly overblown. As I explained in an article for National Review back in 2011, Republicans achieved a policy victory and – at worst – a political draw in the big […]
[…] in 1995 when Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton had their famous shutdown battle. The Democrats were anxious to cut a deal to get the gravy train rolling again, and Republicans used that leverage to achieve a significant policy […]
[…] Senator from Texas, understands that the shutdown fight in 1995 led to very good results. I wrote a piece for National Review making the same point, so I’m delighted to hear someone else singing from the same sheet of music. Pay close attention […]
[…] of the fiscal year. Being a thoughtful guy, I gave them some unsolicited advice on how to prevail, explaining for National Review how Republicans basically won the shutdown fight of 1995-1996. Sadly, they didn’t take my advice and they wound up with a crummy deal. And that paved the way […]
[…] in 1995 when Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton had their famous shutdown battle. The Democrats were anxious to cut a deal to get the gravy train rolling again, and Republicans used that leverage to achieve a significant policy […]
[…] in 1995 when Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton had their famous shutdown battle. The Democrats were anxious to cut a deal to get the gravy train rolling again, and Republicans used that leverage to achieve a significant policy […]
[…] Senator from Texas, understands that the shutdown fight in 1995 led to very good results. I wrote a piece for National Review making the same point, so I’m delighted to hear someone else singing from the same sheet of music. Pay close attention […]
[…] Senator from Texas, understands that the shutdown fight in 1995 led to very good results. I wrote a piece for National Review making the same point, so I’m delighted to hear someone else singing from the same sheet of music. Pay close […]
[…] In the article, I argue that “…lawmakers should insist on genuine spending cuts. And if Obama balks, let him be the one to shut down useless and counterproductive bureaucracies such as the Department of Education and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.” The potential risk of this strategy is that voters will blame fiscal conservatives if there’s a government shutdown, but I explained in an article for National Review that this was a very successful strategy in the mid-1990s. […]
[…] In the article, I argue that “…lawmakers should insist on genuine spending cuts. And if Obama balks, let him be the one to shut down useless and counterproductive bureaucracies such as the Department of Education and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.” The potential risk of this strategy is that voters will blame fiscal conservatives if there’s a government shutdown, but I explained in an article for National Review that this was a very successful strategy in the mid-1990s. […]
[…] of the fiscal year. Being a thoughtful guy, I gave them some unsolicited advice on how to prevail, explaining for National Review how Republicans basically won the shutdown fight of 1995-1996. Sadly, they didn’t take my advice and they wound up with a crummy deal. And that paved the way […]
[…] of the fiscal year. Being a thoughtful guy, I gave them some unsolicited advice on how to prevail, explaining for National Review how Republicans basically won the shutdown fight of 1995-1996. Sadly, they didn’t take my advice and they wound up with a crummy deal. And that paved the […]
[…] of the fiscal year. Being a thoughtful guy, I gave them some unsolicited advice on how to prevail, explaining for National Review how Republicans basically won the shutdown fight of 1995-1996. Sadly, they didn’t take my advice and they wound up with a crummy deal. And that paved the […]
[…] for additional bad policy over the next two years (much as the acquiescence to Obama during the March 2011 “government shutdown” fight was a sign of things to come for the last years, but at least we resuscitated two good […]
[…] early in the year and revolved around spending levels for the remainder of the 2011 fiscal year. I explained in February of that year how advocates of smaller government could prevail in a governme…, especially since the “essential” parts of the government wouldn’t be […]
[…] early in the year and revolved around spending levels for the remainder of the 2011 fiscal year. I explained in February of that year how advocates of smaller government could prevail in a governme…, especially since the “essential” parts of the government wouldn’t be […]
[…] early in the year and revolved around spending levels for the remainder of the 2011 fiscal year. I explained in February of that year how advocates of smaller government could prevail in a governme…, especially since the “essential” parts of the government wouldn’t be […]
[…] early in the year and revolved around spending levels for the remainder of the 2011 fiscal year. I explained in February of that year how advocates of smaller government could prevail in a governme…, especially since the “essential” parts of the government wouldn’t be […]
[…] early in the year and revolved around spending levels for the remainder of the 2011 fiscal year. I explained in February of that year how advocates of smaller government could prevail in a governme…, especially since the “essential” parts of the government wouldn’t be […]
[…] budget fights this year began with the “shutdown” battle, followed by the Ryan budget and then the debt limit. These fights have mostly led to uninspiring […]
[…] budget fights this year began with the “shutdown” battle, followed by the Ryan budget and then the debt limit. These fights have mostly led to uninspiring […]
[…] was their first opportunity. I was hoping for an extra-base hit off the fence, but the GOP was afraid of a government shutdown and negotiated from a position of weakness. As such, the best interpretation is that they eked out […]
[…] was their first opportunity. I was hoping for an extra-base hit off the fence, but the GOP was afraid of a government shutdown and negotiated from a position of weakness. As such, the best interpretation is that they eked out […]
[…] was their first opportunity. I was hoping for an extra-base hit off the fence, but the GOP was afraid of a government shutdown and negotiated from a position of weakness. As such, the best interpretation is that they eked out […]
[…] short end of the stick – largely because they were afraid of a government shutdown (even though I explained Republicans actually did very well during and following the 1995 fight with […]
[…] was their first opportunity. I was hoping for an extra-base hit off the fence, but the GOP was afraid of a government shutdown and negotiated from a position of weakness. As such, the best interpretation is that they eked out […]
[…] end of the stick – largely because they were afraid of a government shutdown (even though I explained Republicans actually did very well during and following the 1995 fight with […]
[…] we didn’t get the shutdown, which I think could have been a key tactic to get more budget cuts, so let’s at least enjoy some one-liners about the topic from the late-night […]
[…] think Barnes is a bit off in his portrayal of what happened in 1995, as I’ve previously explained, but these are all fair points. A “shutdown” fight could be considered uncharted […]
[…] think Barnes is a bit off in his portrayal of what happened in 1995, as I’ve previously explained, but these are all fair points. A “shutdown” fight could be considered uncharted […]
[…] think Barnes is a bit off in his portrayal of what happened in 1995, as I’ve previously explained, but these are all fair points. A “shutdown” fight could be considered uncharted […]
[…] think Barnes is a bit off in his portrayal of what happened in 1995, as I’ve previously explained, but these are all fair points. A “shutdown” fight could be considered uncharted […]
[…] think Barnes is a bit off in his portrayal of what happened in 1995, as I've previously explained, but these are all fair points. A "shutdown" fight could be considered uncharted […]
[…] think Barnes is a bit off in his portrayal of what happened in 1995, as I’ve previously explained, but these are all fair points. A “shutdown” fight could be considered uncharted […]
[…] think Barnes is a bit off in his portrayal of what happened in 1995, as I’ve previously explained, but these are all fair points. A “shutdown” fight could be considered uncharted […]
[…] already explained, in an article for National Review Online, why GOPers should not allow themselves to be blackmailed on this basis. The 1995 shutdown was a big policy success. Republicans did not get everything they […]
[…] already explained, in an article for National Review Online, why GOPers should not allow themselves to be blackmailed on this basis. The 1995 shutdown was a big policy success. Republicans did not get everything they […]
[…] already explained, in an article for National Review Online, why GOPers should not allow themselves to be blackmailed on this basis. The 1995 shutdown was a big policy success. Republicans did not get everything they […]
[…] already explained, in an article for National Review Online, why GOPers should not allow themselves to be blackmailed on this basis. The 1995 shutdown was a big policy success. Republicans did not get everything they […]
[…] already explained, in an article for National Review Online, why GOPers should not allow themselves to be blackmailed on this basis. The 1995 shutdown was a big policy success. Republicans did not get everything they […]
[…] already explained, in an article for National Review Online, why GOPers should not allow themselves to be blackmailed on this basis. The 1995 shutdown was a big policy success. Republicans did not get everything they […]
[…] this discussion on Larry Kudlow’s show, I reiterate the central point from my National Review article and explain that the government shutdown in 1995 led to real fiscal restr…. If that was a loss for the GOP, I hope they lose again this […]
[…] this discussion on Larry Kudlow’s show, I reiterate the central point from my National Review article and explain that the government shutdown in 1995 led to real fiscal restr…. If that was a loss for the GOP, I hope they lose again this […]
[…] this discussion on Larry Kudlow’s show, I reiterate the central point from my National Review article and explain that the government shutdown in 1995 led to real fiscal restr…. If that was a loss for the GOP, I hope they lose again this […]
[…] That being said, the battle is far from over. Indeed, the GOP began the 1995 shutdown fight in good shape. As I explained in a recent National Review article, a significant number of congressional Democrats sided with Republicans and it appeared that Clinton …. […]
[…] That being said, the battle is far from over. Indeed, the GOP began the 1995 shutdown fight in good shape. As I explained in a recent National Review article, a significant number of congressional Democrats sided with Republicans and it appeared that Clinton …. […]
[…] That being said, the battle is far from over. Indeed, the GOP began the 1995 shutdown fight in good shape. As I explained in a recent National Review article, a significant number of congressional Democrats sided with Republicans and it appeared that Clinton …. […]
[…] That being said, the battle is far from over. Indeed, the GOP began the 1995 shutdown fight in good shape. As I explained in a recent National Review article, a significant number of congressional Democrats sided with Republicans and it appeared that Clinton …. […]
[…] That being said, the battle is far from over. Indeed, the GOP began the 1995 shutdown fight in good shape. As I explained in a recent National Review article, a significant number of congressional Democrats sided with Republicans and it appeared that Clinton …. […]