Steven Schier: The national and Minnesota government shutdowns: not so similar

Listen to this article

The 2011 Minnesota government shutdown and the 2013 shutdown of the federal government are events with many contrasting impacts. The political consequences of the state’s shutdown were considerable, but it is far from certain that similar consequences will result from the 2013 national government shutdown. As many as six big differences are evident between the two shutdowns. Let’s consider them.

First, the Minnesota state shutdowns are much rarer, and the 2011 shutdown was of unprecedented length in state political history. A 2005 shutdown lasted nine days, but the 2011 shutdown extended 19 days. It also was also the only state government shutdown in the nation in 2011. It thus was a landmark event in state politics. National government shutdowns are nothing new. Seventeen have occurred in the last 35 years. The longest national shutdown occurred in 1995 when the two parties fought over contrasting budget plans. The 2013 national shutdown, while noteworthy, was not as extraordinary an event as was the 2011 state government shutdown.

Second, given its uniqueness, the state government shutdown retained its salience and contributed to GOP reversals in the 2012 elections. The state Republicans lost control of both the state House and Senate and won no statewide elective offices in 2012. National shutdowns produced no similar electoral reversals for the party widely seen as responsible for them. After the 23 day shutdown in 1995, initiated by the Congressional GOP, the party went on to keep control of the House and Senate in the 1996 elections.

Why was the shutdown more salient for Minnesota than national voters in the next election? State government provides many everyday services to citizens. The 2011 Minnesota shutdown closed state parks during the height of summer vacation season. It covered more aspects of government than did the 2013 national shutdown. Not only are national services often less evident to Americans, but “essential federal services” continued to operate during the latest national shutdown. About 83 percent of the national government continued to function, including the U.S. mail, vital national security functions and basic consumer safety procedures. So it’s unlikely that the 2013 national shutdown was or will seem in retrospect as salient to citizens as the 2011 shutdown was to Minnesotans.

A third difference between the impact of the state and national shutdowns lies in the differing conditions of the national and state Republican parties. During and after the state shutdown, the state GOP was facing enormous debts as well as allegations of widespread mismanagement. The party was ill-prepared to counter negative political reaction to the state shutdown. In contrast, the national GOP remains competitive with Democrats in both the fundraising and services that it provides to its candidates.

A fourth difference lies in the differing degree of consensus within the GOP about the shutdowns. State GOP legislators presented a largely united front in pursuing the shutdown, which helped voters to lay blame upon Republicans for its unpleasant outcomes. National GOP legislators this year had varying opinions about the shutdown, reflecting the diverse constituencies they represent. Many Republicans, such as Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Reps. Charles Dent of Pennsylvania and Peter King of New York, were outspoken in decrying the hard line adopted by the House GOP in response to demands from its most conservative members. This differing response may allow particular incumbents to deflect political blame for the shutdown in their districts. No comparable political “cover” was available to state GOP legislators when they faced voters in 2012 after the 2011 shutdown.

A fifth difference between the shutdowns lies in the differences between the political complexion of Minnesota and of the nation as a whole. Minnesota in recent years has become a “light blue” state in which Democrats win most statewide elections. It is far less conservative than the deep red states of the south and west that elected the strongest proponents of the 2013 national shutdown. Minnesota Republican legislators, strongly conservative in a state that is not reliably conservative, took a great risk in enforcing their fiscal philosophy in 2011 through a state government shutdown. The risk failed to pay off. Voters rejected their militant approach to governance and gave Democrats one of their largest election victories in recent years in 2012.

A possible sixth difference lies in the longer-term political fallout of the shutdowns. It is still too early to be sure about the political repercussions of the national shutdown. Some analysts, such as Sean Trende of realclearpolitics.com, see no large adverse electoral impact from the shutdown, but others, including Timothy Noah at MSNBC.com, view the national GOP as big political losers. Peter Beinart of the Daily Beast argues the GOP actually came out ahead in the shutdown battle because the deal ending it maintained the spending levels of the across-the-board budget sequestration favored by the GOP but despised by congressional Democrats. Keeping the spending levels of the fiscal sequestration, Beinart argues, makes that GOP position now seem “middle of the road” and signals a major policy victory for the party

No similar impression benefited the state GOP in Minnesota’s 2011 shutdown. The party won some spending levels that Gov. Mark Dayton initially opposed, but by the 2012 election, the GOP’s spending policies and shutdown militancy had become a fat target for Democratic state legislative candidates. The ensuing DFL legislature executed a wholesale reversal in state tax and spending policy, obliterating any GOP policy legacy from the shutdown. So far, that hasn’t happened nationally, as Beinart notes, nor is it likely to happen unless the Democrats take control of the U.S. House in the 2014 elections — still a long shot after the shutdown.

So the 2011 state government shutdown was more unusual and of lasting salience to voters, occurred when the state GOP was organizationally weak, and happened in a state that is more liberal than the nation as a whole. The Minnesota shutdown produced no lasting policy victories for the state GOP and contributed to a big GOP defeat in the 2012 state elections. So far, the national shutdown shares none of these traits. National Republicans had better hope that this remains the case during the 2014 elections.

Steven Schier is Congdon Professor of Political Science at Carleton College in Northfield, Minnesota.