Feb 14, 2011

The Last Time A Government Shutdown Happened

Let me stress that this describes historic events. This does not tell us what will happen in the future. I will have try to have more on this tomorrow. This is from Social Security's official history (emphasis added):
On November 14, 1995, SSA was advised to begin a shutdown of operations [due to a budget stalemate] beginning at 10 a.m. The Agency’s contingency plan was implemented. Employees were instructed to pay close attention to the media to determine when the impasse was resolved and when to return to work. SSA furloughed 61,415 employees and retained 4,780. The majority of the employees retained were in direct service positions to ensure the continuance of benefits. ... Other functions considered essential and permitted under applicable statutes (including the Anti-Deficiency Act) during a lapse in appropriations related to areas of health and safety, oversight and coordination of all human resources and financial functions related to the furlough.

SSA’s contingency plan was altered shortly after the shutdown began when the Commissioner approved the recall of an additional 130 Office of Hearings and Appeals employees to handle time-sensitive mail in the hearing offices. Without the assistance of these employees, this claims-related mail would have been returned to the sender, further delaying claims processing. ...

It was evident to Agency executives after a couple of days that the shutdown was not acceptable, and that it was affecting some of its most vulnerable people, namely its elderly, disabled, and low-income recipients. It became very clear that it was important that SSA reopen its offices to conduct business, even during the shutdown. There was tremendous concern internally, as well as within the White House that SSA not providing service would cause harm to too many Americans.

President Clinton held a press conference that afternoon and announced to the public that this shutdown was unacceptable, that Americans needed to be able to conduct business, and that SSA was recalling approximately 49,715 more employees in direct service positions back to work. This involved recalling sufficient staff to effectively administer its programs, including processing new claims for Social Security benefits. This put field offices, the toll-free 800 number service and State DDS facilities back in business. Although SSA would take and process new applications for benefits and resume processing appeals, it would not process applications for SSNs, perform personal earnings and benefits estimates or conduct annual wage reporting activities. A total of 54,495 staff would be retained. ...

There was a great deal of discussion and some dissention internally over which employees should return to work, and that if SSA was going to recall 54,000 employees, why not recall all 66,000. The concern was that by recalling all but 12,000 employees, what message were you sending to them? ...

The second shutdown was the longest in history and presented new challenges to Agency management. When the threat of a second shutdown surfaced, SSA determined that the trust funds and benefit programs could not tolerate another interruption of claims-taking activities. Based on the experience during the November lapse in appropriations and the loss of four full days of production time, any further interruption in service would have a devastating long-term impact on SSA’s ability to process Social Security, SSI and Black Lung claims. The Agency was still attempting to recover from the effects of the November furlough. Therefore, employees in direct service positions would remain operational, while staff support employees would be furloughed. When the partial shutdown began December 16, 1995, about 55,000 Agency employees, most of whom processed claims and/or provided direct public service, were told to report for work. A total of approximately 11,000 staff employees remained furloughed.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

And everyone ended up getting paid for the forced days off.

SSAs reaction to this was a joke. It gave the pretense of actual service when virtually nothing got done. If this happens again, the agency should shut down completely. Get the public involved and that will put an end to these games quickly instead of trying to please everyone.

It's time Federal agencies became proactive and the public informed about how important these services are. When those checks stop, you'll see an avalanche of protest that will get things fixed quickly. Playing games and putting on a show isn't enough.

JMS said...

Ah the good old days of Republican hubris.... I hope the President and his cabinet have the intestinal fortitude to really shut down the federal government this time. I mean really shut it down--do NOT conduct any Social Security work and keep the offices/tele-service centers closed; send home the air traffic controllers (how will the Republicans corporate masters like that?); close all the national parks/forests/monuments etc.; close all the customs offices--let the imported junk from China sit on the piers; order the FBI to cease providing immediate background checks for firearms purchases; send all the food inspectors home so nothing gets to market. Unfortunately too many Americans are completely ignorant about the multitude of services the Federal government provides. Someone needs to stand up to the grandstanding blowhards in the Republican party and the Tiny Tots Tea Party. I hope Mr. Obama does.

Anonymous said...

Amen, JMS. There should be consequences for actions. Do it, Obama.

Nancy Ortiz said...

Yes, shut down is shut down. Last time it wasn't. So, if no government is what you want then no government is what you should get. Ummm. Like. Now.

Anonymous said...

Teach them a lesson this time. Its about time they realize its not tea their drinking but Koolade.

Anonymous said...

While that would certainly send a message, the concept is quite juvenile. A "you don't give me what I want, so take this" kind of thought process. Sure, it would send a message to those who believe the Federal government does nothing, but it would also prevent people in dire need of the services the Federal government provides from receiving them. The government must find a different way to inform the public of the services it provides, the effects of those services, and the consequences if those services are stopped.

Anonymous said...

There is no "different way." Period. Until people suffer the consequences of their actions, they simply do not learn. It's that simple--and it's not juvenile.

Anonymous said...

And they might actually think about the way they vote.

Nobbins said...

SSA is horrible at standing up for itself. Astrue doesn't want to offend anybody in power, and Courtney, the DC in charge of Communications, is a Bush hold-over that has deliberately crippled SSA's public outreach campaigns.

It is amazing to see any organization as marginalized as SSA and not do a thing to address the criticism. Allowing it to really shut down may be the only thing its overly passive leadership can accomplish.