US Federal Funding Gaps History

Historical US Federal Funding Gaps & Political Party Control

By Throwback Thursday [source]

About this dataset

This dataset is a comprehensive historical record of federal funding gaps in the United States, spanning from 1976 to 2018. It provides detailed information on each funding gap, including the start and end dates, total duration in days, and whether or not employees were furloughed.

The dataset also includes data on the political party control during each funding gap, specifically for both the Senate and the House of Representatives. For each chamber, it indicates which party had control - either Democrats or Republicans - as well as any representation by Independent members.

Additionally, this dataset contains valuable insights into the impact of federal funding gaps on government employees. It records the number of employees who were furloughed during each gap, allowing for analysis of workforce disruption and potential economic consequences.

By leveraging this dataset's wealth of information on federal funding gaps in the United States over more than four decades, researchers can gain a deeper understanding of these significant events in governmental operations and their broader implications for various stakeholders

How to use the dataset

Introduction:

• Understanding the Columns: a) Start Date: The date when a federal funding gap began. b) End Date: The date when a federal funding gap ended. c) Total days: The duration of the federal funding gap in days. d) Employees furloughed: A boolean value indicating whether or not employees were furloughed during that specific funding gap. (True = Employees were furloughed, False = No employee was furloughed.) e) Number of Employees Furloughed: The actual count of employees who were furloughed during that specific funding gap. f) Senate Control: The political party that had control over the Senate during each particular period specified. (Categorical - Democratic, Republican) g) Senate Democrats: The number of Democratic senators serving during that specific funding gap. h) Senate Republicans: The number of Republican senators serving during that particular period specified. i) Senate Independents: The number of Independent senators serving at that time frame. j ) House Control :He political party that had control over House Representatives throughoted specific dataried by each perticularnce k ) House Democrats -

• Analyzing Duration and Furloughs: You can compute various statistics about federal funding gaps using relevant columns such as 'Start Date,' 'End Date,' 'Total days,' 'Employees furloughed,' 'Number of Employees Furloughed. For example:

  • Calculate the average duration of funding gaps during a specific time period.
  • Determine the total number of funding gaps that resulted in employee furloughs.
  • Analyze the average number of employees furloughed during various periods.

• Understanding Party Control: The dataset includes information about political party control over Senate and House Representatives during funding gaps. • Analyzing Senate Control:

  • Determine which party controlled the Senate during each funding gap period.
  • Compare the prevalence of Democratic, Republican, or Independent control over time.
  1. Exploring

Research Ideas

• Analyzing the impact of federal funding gaps on government employees: This dataset can be used to study the number of employees who were furloughed during each funding gap and analyze the duration of their furlough. It can provide insights into the economic effects and hardships faced by government workers during such periods.
• Examining the political dynamics during funding gaps: By analyzing the control of both the House of Representatives and Senate during each funding gap, this dataset can shed light on how political party control affected negotiations and resolutions. It can help identify patterns or trends in bipartisan cooperation or conflict during these periods.
• Comparing different funding gaps over time: With information on start dates, end dates, and total days for each gap, this dataset allows for comparisons across different periods in history. Researchers can assess whether funding gaps have become more frequent or longer-lasting over time and identify any patterns that may exist in relation to economic factors or political developments

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. Data Source

License

See the dataset d...

United States The Economist YouGov Polls: 2024 Presidential Election: Donald Trump data was reported at 46.000 % in 29 Oct 2024. This stayed constant from the previous number of 46.000 % for 22 Oct 2024. United States The Economist YouGov Polls: 2024 Presidential Election: Donald Trump data is updated weekly, averaging 43.000 % from May 2023 (Median) to 29 Oct 2024, with 61 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 46.000 % in 29 Oct 2024 and a record low of 38.000 % in 31 Oct 2023. United States The Economist YouGov Polls: 2024 Presidential Election: Donald Trump data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by YouGov PLC. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.PR004: The Economist YouGov Polls: 2024 Presidential Election (Discontinued). If an election for president were going to be held now and the Democratic nominee was Joe Biden and the Republican nominee was Donald Trump, would you vote for...

This data collection contains three files of county-level electoral returns for Ohio, Michigan, Nebraska, and New York in the period 1912, and 1920-1940. The data files were prepared for instructional use in the ICPSR Training Program and for graduate-level social science courses at the University of Michigan and other university campuses. They contain social, demographic, electoral, and economic data for various areas of the United States, usually for an extended period of time. Part 1, Ohio Referenda Counties as Units, and Part 2, Ohio Referenda as Units, consist of county-level returns for 42 referenda in the 1912 general election in Ohio. Data are provided for the names of counties, votes in the affirmative, total number of votes, and percentage of the "yes" votes for referenda on issues such as civil juries, capital punishment, governor's veto, workmen's compensation, 8-hour day, removal of elected officials, prison labor, women's suffrage, and taxes. The referenda included many questions considered important in the Progressive Movement. Part 3, Data Sets for Three States (Michigan, Nebraska, and New York), consists of electoral returns for the offices of president, governor, and United States representative, as well as ecological and population characteristics data in the period 1920-1940. Data are provided for the raw votes and percentage of the total votes received by the Democratic, Republican, Progressive, and other parties. Items also provide information on population characteristics, such as the total number of population, voting age population, urban population, and persons of other races, and school attendance and religion. Economic variables provide information on local government expenditures and revenues, agriculture and manufacturing, employment and unemployment, and the total number of banks and bank deposits.