Shutdown Theatre: America’s Strange Annual Ritual
Members of Congress gathered to honor Charlie Kirk. (Image X.com)
Despite being the world’s largest economy and issuer of the global reserve currency, the US remains uniquely vulnerable to recurring government shutdown crises that unsettle markets and shake global confidence.
By P SESH KUMAR
NEW DELHI, September 20, 2025 — The United States, the world’s largest economy and issuer of the global reserve currency, periodically teeters on the brink of shutting down its own government. This bizarre ritual, which recurs almost every fiscal year, sees headlines about offices closing, employees going unpaid, markets trembling, and even global financial systems catching a cold.
Strangely enough, such episodes are almost uniquely America. We do not hear of Britain, India, or the European Union rehearsing shutdown dramas every autumn.
The Anatomy of a Shutdown
A “shutdown” is not some apocalyptic blackout but a suspension of non-essential government functions because Congress (equivalent to Indian Parliament) has failed to pass a budget or temporary funding bill by the September 30 deadline. In the US, the Constitution grants Congress the “power of the purse.”
Without explicit authorization, no money can be spent. Federal employees then face furloughs (unpaid leave), services grind to a halt, national parks lock their gates, and research labs dim their lights. Essential services like the military, Social Security, or air traffic control continue, but only under severe stress.
This brinkmanship plays out almost every year because of the sharp division between the House of Representatives (equivalent to our Lok Sabha), the Senate (equivalent to our Rajya Sabha – but with power over ‘money bills’), and the White House (the President).
When political parties refuse to compromise—say, over immigration, healthcare, or climate funding—the budget becomes a hostage. Shutdowns are not theoretical: the longest one, under President Trump in 2018–19, dragged on for 35 days, throwing hundreds of thousands of workers into financial distress.
Why Only in America?
Here lies the crux: why does this circus not take place in Westminster, New Delhi, or Brussels? The answer lies in institutional design. The US system separates executive and legislature so rigidly that neither can unilaterally release funds. In parliamentary democracies like the UK or India, budgets are tied to confidence in the government.
If Parliament rejects a budget, the government falls and elections follow. That threat keeps the system from indulging in endless deadlock. Similarly, the European Union has built-in financial frameworks spanning multiple years, insulating it from sudden political paralysis.
The US, however, thrives—or suffers—on divided government. It is perfectly normal for one party to control the White House and another to control Congress. Polarization then transforms budget-making into political theatre.
Each side dangles the shutdown threat as leverage, knowing the costs will be borne by ordinary citizens. This quirk of constitutional design—an accident of the Founding Fathers’ obsession with checks and balances—makes America uniquely prone to annual shutdown scares.
Sign of Vibrant Democracy or Systemic Flaw?
American politicians often defend this chaos as democracy in action—a noisy, unruly, but vibrant contest of ideas. They argue that the shutdown threat forces accountability and keeps government from bloating unchecked. Yet critics view it as dysfunction masquerading as freedom.
For a nation whose Treasury bonds anchor the world economy, repeatedly weaponizing its budget process undermines trust at home and abroad. When furloughed workers queue at food banks or Wall Street shivers at the possibility of default, the “vibrancy” argument sounds hollow.
Other democracies manage fierce debate without threatening to close their governments like a shop at dusk. The truth is, shutdown brinkmanship erodes faith in institutions and projects instability into global markets. It is less a symbol of vibrancy and more a symptom of extreme partisanship.
Partisan Polarization Pain
The solution lies in structural reform, though America’s constitutional rigidity makes this difficult. Some propose automatic continuing resolutions—rules that keep the government funded at prior levels if no new budget is passed. Others point to the European Union’s practice of multi-year budgeting, which insulates funding from annual political brawls.
India, too, despite scrapping its Five-Year Plans, follows a framework of annual budgets guided by medium- and long-term strategies prepared by NITI Aayog. This ensures continuity and predictability without the annual threat of disruption.
Ultimately, reducing partisan polarization is the only lasting cure. Until then, Americans—and the world—must brace themselves every September for the recurring drama of “shutdown theatre.”
In the end, it is not a sign of democratic health but of democratic indulgence. A vibrant democracy should be loud, argumentative, even chaotic—but it should never be self-destructive.
(This is an opinion piece, and views expressed are those of the author only)
Follow The Raisina Hills on WhatsApp, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, and LinkedIn
About The Author
