The Continued Continuing Resolution: When Leadership Fails to Lead
Imagine if you were running a business where half the year passes before you even approve your budget - and when you submit your numbers, you just copy and paste last year's numbers because nobody can agree on what needs to change. For virtually all organizations, this is a sign of serious dysfunction. But in DC, this has become the norm.
After months of uncertainty and back-and-forth, Congress and the President finally signed a "continuing resolution" (CR) budget to fund the government for the current fiscal year. The problem is our current fiscal year began October 1, 2024.
In other words, it took nearly half the year to approve a stopgap measure to fund the current year we're in.
But this isn't a real budget. With a few exceptions, it's a copy-and-paste of last year's budget, avoiding making necessary tough decisions and kicking the can down the road.
The latest CR passed not because of strong leadership, but because neither party wanted to take the blame for a government shutdown. Democrats largely opposed the bill, pointing to provisions they disagreed with. Ultimately, some voted in favor - but not because they supported the bill, but because they believed a shutdown would be worse. Meanwhile Republicans (who control both the House and Senate) struggled internally to agree on changes, delaying the process due to internal party disputes before finally approving the measure.
In any organization or leadership role, this would be considered a failure.
Leadership isn't about just keeping things afloat - it's about making proactive decisions, intentional planning, and taking responsibility. Reactive, crisis-driven leadership - where decisions are made last minute or on the fly - isn't leadership at all.
The inability to plan ahead is one of the biggest failures one can make - whether in government, business, or even in our personal lives. When leaders default to reaction mode, they:
Lose credibility: People will stop trusting leadership when they see repeated dysfunction (the average congressional approval rating hovers in the teens)
Make worse decisions. Rushed choices rarely lead to good long-term outcomes.
Damage morale. Constant uncertainty will erode trust and wear people down - whether it's employees, citizens, or teams.
Strong leaders don't wait until the last minute to act. They set priorities, communicate their vision, and take responsibility for their decisions.
So how do we fix this? As leaders in our own spheres of influence, how do we avoid falling into the same trap?
It starts with proactive leadership. As I talk about in my book, It's Not the Tech, the best leaders don't let problems simmer until they boil over - they anticipate challenges and address them early. Rather than leading (or governing) through constant crises, they take ownership before it spirals out of control.
Another key factor is decisiveness. Indecision, political posturing, and endless back-and-forth weakens leadership. Strong leaders can make tough calls - even when not everyone agrees. They recognize that delaying a decision can be worse than making an imperfect one.
Finally, long-term vision sets great leaders apart from so-so ones. Instead of relying on short-term patches and band-aids, they focus on sustainable, forward-thinking strategies. They prioritize long-term, lasting impact over temporary fixes, ensuring their organizations, teams, or nations aren't just surviving - but thriving.
At the end of the day, strong leaders don't avoid hard decisions - they strive to make them before they become emergencies.
Be sure to grab a copy of my book It's Not the Tech, which is available in paperback and eReader formats now!
(Audible coming April 2025)