US government ‘shutdown’ again: Why do these crises keep happening and what do they really mean? –

Government shutdowns in the United States can sometimes feel like a soap opera. As soon as one funding crisis is resolved, reports of another shutdown begin to emerge.Repetition of the term “shutdown” can create confusion, raising many questions such as, “Didn’t this just happen? Does a shutdown mean that the entire government will simply go on vacation? Does it imply that federal agencies have run out of money?”But the reality is much more nuanced. Not all closings are the same.

Some affect large parts of the federal government, while others disrupt only specific agencies. More often than not, these events stem from political deadlock rather than financial collapse.The United States is once again dealing with a government shutdown. To many observers, it may seem like it’s happened before. Not long ago, the country emerged from what has become the longest lockdown in its history, surpassing the previous record set in 2018-19. It is worth noting that this represents the third shutdown of Donald Trump’s second term.Let’s take a closer look at how the US government shutdown actually happens — what’s happening, why it’s happening, and why it might seem like a recurring theme in American politics.

What is a government shutdown?

To understand the complexities, let’s start with the basic “what” question. A US government shutdown occurs when Congress fails to pass appropriations legislation needed to fund federal agencies and programs before current spending authority expires.

Federal agencies and programs generally cannot spend money or make payments without that legal authority. Under the Anti-Deficit Act, agencies are prohibited from assuming liabilities or spending funds without making appropriations, even if cash remains available.The U.S. Government Accountability Office defines anti-deficit law as “prohibits federal agencies from obligating or expending federal funds in advance or in excess of appropriations, and from accepting voluntary services.”

As a result, agencies affected by the loss of accreditations must cease operations except in limited circumstances.In practice:

In short, this means that the shutdown occurred not because the government “ran out of money,” but because agencies ran out of spending power.Let’s understand the differences in ‘lockdowns’ from the last three lockdowns

Three lockdowns, one period: why funding crises keep coming back

Since returning to the White House for a second term, Donald Trump’s presidency has already seen three separate government shutdowns We have to understand each of these individually, as putting them together hides some key details.These were all “lockdowns,” so to speak, but they were not the same kind of crises.One of them was historical. Two were partial. Each tells a different story about how American government finance works.

The largest: the longest in US history

The most important episode began on October 1, 2025.Congress failed to pass major appropriations bills needed to fund large portions of the federal government for the new fiscal year. Thus, the agencies were forced to halt their operations.Although Republicans control both chambers, Senate rules require 60 votes to advance legislation.

With Republicans gaining 53 seats, the bill relied on Democratic support.This support was not achieved. Democrats have resisted the measure, saying it should include extending expiring tax credits that help lower health insurance costs for millions of Americans. The dispute stalled negotiations, allowing funding authority for several federal agencies to expire.What seemed like a routine funding crisis quickly escalated, with neither party willing to compromise, and the shutdown extended for 43 days.

What is closed: Because many appropriations bills fell through, the crisis produced widespread unrest:

Even critical infrastructure felt strained.Air traffic controllers, classified as essential employees, continued to work without pay. Staffing shortages quickly became apparent as some workers called in sick, contributing to widespread flight delays and cancellations.To stabilize the system, authorities imposed temporary reductions in flights across dozens of airports, including some of the country’s busiest.What remains open: Despite the scale of the disruption, many parts of the government continued to function.Essential services remained active:

Eventually, once the funding legislation was approved, the agencies gradually began to restore their operations. Furloughed employees were recalled, while essential workers, who remained unpaid, awaited back pay, which Congress has historically allowed after shutdowns.However, not all programs rebounded immediately. Many federal initiatives have faced delays in resuming normal operations.

System capacity, staffing levels, and program funding often take days, sometimes weeks, to stabilize.Economic data also revealed effects that persist far beyond that.According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), as recently reported by Reuters, US economic growth slowed sharply in the fourth quarter of 2025, with gross domestic product expanding at an annual rate of 1.4 percent, well below economists’ expectations of 3.0 percent and a marked slowdown from the 4.4 percent pace recorded in the third quarter.On the other hand, federal government spending contracted at an annual rate of 16.6%, the steepest decline since the third quarter of 1972, reflecting diminished public services, delayed purchases of goods and services, and temporary disruption of programs including Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits.This decline reduced GDP growth by 1.15 percentage points, the largest decline in federal spending since 1994.Over the entire year, federal government spending fell 1.2 percent, the largest annual decline for E three years ago.But on a small positive note, the broader economy has proven resilient in some ways.Consumer spending – which accounts for more than two-thirds of US economic activity – grew at a still-strong rate of 2.4 percent, while business investment remained supported by higher spending on intellectual property, which rose 7.4 percent, driven largely by AI-related research and development.Although some losses last forever.The Congressional Budget Office estimated in January that although much of the lost output would be reversed, $7 billion to $14 billion in economic activity would be permanently lost, reflecting canceled consumption, lost services, and lost production that cannot shift across the seasons.

Close 2: Brief, quiet, partial

Just months after the lockdown was resolved, another funding gap emerged.Between January 31 and February 3 of this year, parts of the government closed again.However, this episode was very different. Unlike the October crisis, Congress has already passed appropriations for several departments through September 2026. Only agencies associated with unresolved funding bills are affected.This was a partial closure. Short and limited but still closed

Trump moved quickly to contain the fallout, signing a sweeping spending package into law that ended the lapse just three days later.The legislation, passed following intense internal negotiations among Republicans, funded nearly three-quarters of government agencies, providing what lawmakers called long-awaited certainty after months of fiscal brinksmanship and painful shutdowns.However, the agreement came with an important caveat. Congress has been unable to secure a full budget for one critical department: the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).Instead, lawmakers only approved a temporary funding extension, effectively creating another funding deadlock just two weeks later and still ongoing.The political tensions behind the confrontation were revealing.House Republican leaders have faced resistance from conservative lawmakers who have called for stricter voter identification laws to be attached to the funding package. This campaign has centered on proposals to require stricter standards for identification in federal elections, an issue that has long divided lawmakers along partisan lines.

Initially, a small but vocal faction threatened to filibuster the bill, pushing the party leadership, and Trump himself, into last-minute negotiations to prevent another prolonged shutdown.The operational consequences reflected the limited scope of the lockdown:• Some federal employees have been furloughed – temporarily placed on unpaid leave • Affected agencies have slowed or temporarily halted certain functions • Most government operations continued normallyHowever, the resolution was mostly incomplete.With the Department of Homeland Security funded only through a stopgap measure, lawmakers have effectively postponed their most contentious budget battle; One focuses on immigration enforcement, federal law enforcement, and ICE policy, rather than resolving them.As House Speaker Mike Johnson said publicly: “The real fight begins over the Homeland Bill.”

Lockdown 3: DHS Funding Crisis

The third chapter of the 2025-2026 US lockdown story began last week, and is still unfolding.This time, the motive was funding for the Department of Homeland Security, which expired after lawmakers failed to agree on a new appropriations package. Unlike previous lockdown battles, this standoff was driven by a political struggle over immigration enforcement and oversight powers.Everything else remained funded. But again, a partial lockdown – with very clear consequences.

The stalemate has escalated amid contested immigration enforcement proceedings in Minneapolis that have put federal agents under national scrutiny.

In early January, Renee Nicole Judd, a 37-year-old US citizen, was fatally shot by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent during a federal operation in Minneapolis, a death later ruled a homicide by local authorities and sparking mass protests. Days later, a Minneapolis resident, intensive care unit nurse Alex Pretty, was killed in a separate standoff with federal agents, intensifying public outrage and political pressure.In response, many Democrats in Congress tied new DHS funding to legal reforms aimed at tightening use-of-force rules, requiring warrants, and increasing oversight, conditions that Republicans and the White House opposed, arguing that appropriations bills were not the appropriate vehicle for rewriting enforcement authority.The result has been the paradox that ICE itself continues to operate under existing appropriations, even while the DHS shutdown has constrained other components of the department.Thus, while DHS oversees TSA, FEMA, Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and multiple border and security missions, even a targeted funding lapse impacts daily life.Effects include:

This closure appears large because the Department of Homeland Security is large — and because its services directly intersect with travel, border control, and disaster response.

Why do lockdowns continue?

Not only financial collapse, but also political deadlock.These final three chapters illustrate the structural reality of governance in the United States: The federal government is not funded by one major budget.The main factor is the fiscal year calendar and overlapping deadlines. T The US government’s fiscal year began on October 1, and Congress must pass 12 separate bills to fund all federal agencies. Some bills are passed on time while others are delayed, creating partial funding gaps.

To prevent immediate disruptions, lawmakers often adopt temporary continuing resolutions (CRs), which are temporary measures that extend funding for a limited period while negotiations continue. However, CRs themselves have expiration dates, and if Congress cannot agree on a full bill before the CR expires, another shutdown will occur for that department in question. This cycle can be repeated several times during a fiscal year, which is why the United States often experiences frequent and intermittent lockdowns.Which means:

Another aspect is that it is rarely just about accounting deadlines or technical funding mechanisms. All of these shutdowns were ultimately shaped by deeper political clashes between Democrats and Republicans, as budget negotiations became a vehicle for larger ideological disagreements.For example, the reason for the October 2025 shutdown was not just disagreement over overall spending levels, but the root cause included a standoff over extending expiring health insurance tax credits, and a policy clash over the federal government’s role in subsidizing health care costs. The January 2026 lapse reflects tensions within the Republican Party itself, as conservative lawmakers pushed to tie tougher voter identification legislation to a funding package that leadership wanted to pass quickly.Meanwhile, the current DHS shutdown focuses on immigration enforcement powers, oversight of agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and competing views of federal law enforcement authority.

Government shutdown – could it happen in India?

Government shutdowns are a recurring feature of American politics, largely because of how the American system is designed.The United States follows a presidential model where the executive and legislative powers are separate. The president does not automatically control Congress, even if the same party is in power.This structure makes funding deadlines natural pressure points. In the Senate, most major legislation requires 60 votes to pass, which requires bipartisan approval. When negotiations break down, a budget delay can quickly turn into a lockout.The system in India works differently.India follows a parliamentary model where the executive is drawn from Parliament itself. A government that cannot secure the effective adoption of financial legislation faces a crisis of confidence. Thus, budget failure constitutes a political threat to the government, not a reason for administrative closure.Most importantly, the Constitution provided guarantees.

Under Article 116, Parliament can approve a vote on account, which enables the government to withdraw money from the Consolidated Fund of India to meet essential expenses during the budget debate. This ensures that the normal operations of government, such as the payment of salaries, pensions, benefits and interest payments, are not interrupted at the beginning of the financial year.In simple terms, India is not facing the kind of funding crunch that would see ministries or departments suddenly grind to a halt. The budget preparation process has become standardized, and constitutional provisions prevent sudden spending paralysis.That’s why American-style lockdowns, triggered by funding disputes and political gridlock, are nearly impossible under India’s governance structure.