Game Theory and the Government Shutdown
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/how-the-shutdown-might-end-according-to-game-theory
In this article, “How the Shutdown Might End, According to Game Theory”, PBS reporter Nsikan Akpan writes about the heated government shutdown early this year and how it related to game theory. The shutdown was ostensibly about government funding and how much of that funding should go towards border security and the proposed wall, but Akpan presents it more as a game of political maneuvering between Trump and the congressional Democrats as both parties fight to maintain face and gain potential voters. The standoff is most comparable to a simple game of chicken, in which two participants are racing headlong towards each other. Either one must turn away first and lose face, both must turn away at the same time and neither gain nor lose anything, or, in what is typically the worst outcome, neither participant turns away and they both crash in a ball of fire. So, the typical outcomes would look like this:
However, because of the added stakes of undecided voters (18 million) and furloughed workers in the White House who are not receiving their salaries (800,000), the outcomes look more like this:
When viewed in this way, it’s easy to see why neither party wished to take the compromise route. There’s so much to gain for both sides, and comparatively very little to lose.
It’s very interesting to look at politics through this lens, and also to consider all of the other factors and options that go into making these kinds of decisions. Very few things are ever so simple as a game of chicken, but that basic structure of competitive risk and reward can be recognized in and applied to many political situations. In the case of the shutdown, Trump had options other than simply “swerving” (compromising on the bill and rescinding his demand for border funding) or “going straight” (continuing with the shutdown). For example, as the article points out, he had the option of declaring a national emergency and going over the heads of Congress. This likely wouldn’t have survived in court, but it would allow Trump to shift the blame from himself onto the judicial system; he didn’t, after all, back down from Congress. As the article puts it, “That’s the only way to end the shutdown while allowing both sides to save face.” In real world applications there are options outside of the box, and its important to consider them when developing theories or predicting what might happen next. And, in the end, it was this option outside of the basic game of chicken that President Trump took.