国际观察丨美联邦政府“停摆”近纪录 民众“伤不起”

Core Points - The U.S. federal government shutdown has entered its 34th day, nearing the record of 35 days set in late 2018 to early 2019, causing significant disruptions in various sectors, particularly aviation, food assistance, and healthcare [1][5] - The shutdown highlights the increasing political polarization in the U.S., with both major parties using the situation to further their political agendas without signs of compromise [1][9] Aviation Industry - Approximately 13,000 air traffic controllers and 50,000 airport security personnel are working without pay, leading to staffing shortages and increased flight delays [2][4] - Nearly 90% of air traffic controllers in the New York area are absent, resulting in significant operational challenges, including a temporary "ground stop" at major airports [4] - The pressure on air traffic controllers has reached an "unacceptable level," raising concerns about aviation safety as some employees seek additional income through side jobs [4][5] Food Assistance and Healthcare - The federal food assistance program, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), has ceased operations as of November 1, affecting 42 million Americans, many of whom live below the poverty line [5][7] - The new enrollment period for the Affordable Care Act has begun, but due to the ongoing political deadlock, insurance premiums are expected to rise significantly, potentially increasing costs by $1,000 per enrollee annually [7] - The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the shutdown could reduce the U.S. GDP growth rate by 1-2 percentage points in Q4, translating to economic losses of $7 billion to $14 billion depending on the duration of the shutdown [7][8] Political Dynamics - The shutdown is primarily driven by a stalemate between the two parties over healthcare spending, with neither side showing urgency to resolve the situation [8][9] - The Republican Party is leveraging the shutdown to push for government downsizing, while the Democratic Party is using it to reinforce its image as a defender of low-income groups [9]