Home

The latest government shutdown began at 12:01 a.m. on October 1, 2025, when Congress failed to pass either a continuing resolution, or full-year appropriations for the new fiscal year. For the next 43 days, it would lead to the longest government shutdown in the history of the United States, as Democrats and Republicans remained in a deadlock. On November 10, the Senate approved a bipartisan spending bill, the House followed on November 12, and President Trump signed, reopening the government again. 

As Congress moved to reopen the government, many Americans hoped that the resolution would be a turning point. Instead, Government Professor Nicholas Jacobs says the shutdown’s end highlights a pattern that has defined Washington for years: political brinkmanship fuels spectacle and uncertainty, and almost never leads to any real meaningful policy change.

“Shutdowns don’t work,” Jacobs said. “They don’t create leverage, they don’t produce policy wins, and they don’t change the underlying political incentives. They’re a very dramatic way of proving that Congress has run out of ideas.”

Jacobs also notes that while shutdowns often draw much media attention, they tend to leave the political landscape almost exactly as they began. This latest showdown, he argues, was no different. 

The country’s overall public opinion barely budged during the course of the showdown, largely because views were set long before the funding lapse started. “Minds were already made up,” Jacobs explained. “Democrats blamed Trump. Republicans blamed Democrats. Independents reminded themselves why they were independent, because both parties are in it for themselves. So nothing has really changed.”

In his view, shutdowns have become a type of predictable ritual: each political side starts to point fingers, claims moral high-ground, then waits for the other to fold, while voters and citizens alike are left dealing with frustration and growing fatigue. Jacobs believes that if anything changes, it’s not ideology, but a heightened sense of distrust. Here it seems there is a widening gap between public expectations and what our political institutions actually deliver. 

One of the most serious long term effects, Jacobs argues, is the weakening of the public’s trust. “People see leaders who seem more animated by the fight than by the function,” he said. “And they draw the obvious conclusion: if the system can’t manage something as basic as keeping itself open, why should anyone believe it can deliver on bigger promises?”

For all the tension that exists, dealing with, and subsequently ending the shutdown avoided none of the policy issues that caused it in the first place. “The shutdown didn’t solve any underlying policy problems,” he said. “Democrats passed the law that allowed premium ACA subsidy credits to sunset because they were tied to the COVID emergency, and that reality is now colliding with higher premiums and insurer uncertainty.” 

Economically, the aftermath from that policy debate looms larger than the existence of the shutdown itself. The idea of restarting the government just to bring federal workers back online and restore services seems like a good idea — a reboot of some sorts — but it does not address the deeper structural issues that sit within the healthcare system. “The shutdown’s end changes none of that,” Jacobs said. “It just restarts the clock on a set of problems Congress hasn’t addressed.”

He also pointed to a subtle political shift seeping out from some progressives. “… [S]ome progressives are starting to ask whether they should keep spending scarce political capital defending a policy that isn’t actually stabilizing healthcare and whether that loyalty is driven more by attachment to Obama’s legacy than by an honest assessment of what’s working.” 

Looking past the policy fights, the actual human and institutional costs of the showdown were quieter, but still important. While federal workers will eventually get their back pay, Jacobs warned of the collective damage caused by the disrupted services. “… [P]rocessing delays, slowed benefits, research interruptions and the quiet administrative work that keeps programs moving,” he said. “Those aren’t dramatic, but they accumulate.”

For institutions and educational services like the College, the shutdown posed little immediate threat. “Colby, frankly, isn’t hit very hard,” Jacobs said. “We don’t depend on large federal grant pipelines, and this isn’t a crunch period for visas or major aid processing, so most of the turbulence barely reached campus this time around.” Still, he cautioned against complacency, for higher education relies on an extensive web of federal support like, as Jacobs referenced, “FAFSA timing, IRS verification, NSF review cycles.” These structures are often invisible until there is an issue at hand that must be rectified.  

 “Shutdowns reveal how much even well-resourced colleges rely on quiet, invisible federal machinery… and how brittle those systems have become,” Jacobs said. “So while Colby isn’t squeezed this time, it’s a reminder that higher education is only as stable as the federal infrastructure it quietly leans on.”

As students start to prepare for Thanksgiving break and as Washington settles back into its usual rhythm, Jacobs believes the lessons from this shutdown should be clear, especially for young people in America witnessing her governance in real time. His message is simple: “Shutdowns don’t work. Brinksmanship doesn’t work.”

The shutdown may have come to an end, but the political motivations that made it possible remain strong. For Jacobs, that is where the real takeaway lies: not just in the drama of confrontation, but a deeper instability. Without foundational reform put in place, he warns, future shutdowns are not just possible, but likely inevitable to occur. 

 

 

~ Mia Dinunzio `28

This past Friday evening, the Student Programming Board (SPB) and Powder & Wig, the College’s student-run theater club, hosted a Murder Mystery Dinner in Foss Dining Hall. The hour-long immersive experience featured a special buffet menu and a performance of the play, This Murder Was Staged.

Attendees were required to reserve a table in advance for one of two showtimes, which were offered back-to-back from 5 to 6 p.m. and from 6:15 to 7:15 p.m. The second showing was in such high demand that they opened an additional six tables to accommodate. According to Ava Beringer `27, publicity chair of Powder & Wig, the cast was excited about the turnout. 

“So many people showed up. Usually we have really great, supportive crowds for Powder & Wig, but… I feel like we attracted more of a general audience who were there for the delicious food and then also, you know, there’s a show going on,” Beringer said. Katelyn Puglia `27, director of This Murder Was Staged, added, “It was really exciting to have a ton of people come to our show who maybe haven’t seen a Powder & Wig show before… I’m hoping that maybe they continue to come to our shows or even get involved themselves.”

No “Murder Mystery Dinner” can be considered complete without a delicious menu. The culinary offerings of the night were diverse, on-theme, and vegetarian-friendly. Each of the twenty-two dishes and drinks was designed to pair perfectly with the show. Audience favorites included Bloody Beet Hummus, Graveyard Chili, and Death by Cheesecake Bites.  

Puglia found that working with dining services to achieve her vision for the night was a piece of cake. Dining staff designed the entire menu, putting thought and care into each edible creation. In her words, “Dining really went above and beyond. I really appreciate everything they did for this show. I was able to, at one of the SPB meetings, chat with them a little bit about our ideas and themes, and then they came up with pretty much all of [the menu].”

She was impressed not only by their commitment to ensuring the evening went smoothly, but also by their genuine enthusiasm about supporting such a unique student-led event, and went on to say that “[a]ll the dining staff were talking to me saying how excited they were for the show, and I just really appreciated how willing they were to collaborate with students.”

After everyone had filed in and sat down at their assigned tables with plates piled high, Puglia mounted the stage, bringing the volume of the room down to a hush. She gave a quick thanks to the audience, cast, and crew, and the play began. 

Performing in Foss Dining Hall was not without its challenges. Powder & Wig was tasked with staying true to the play’s script, working with the constraints of the building, and attempting to make the show an immersive experience for the audience. Puglia, describing the process of shortening the original script to account for limited time, explained, “It was definitely a collaborative thing of deciding what would work in the space.” Throughout the play, performers made use of the stage at the east end of the dining hall, spoke from the top of the large staircase at the entrance, and walked amongst the audience members in the main seating area.

Multiple cast members, including McKenzie Martin `26 and Beringer, played two roles, requiring costume changes. However, Foss does not have a green room, which is a space performers traditionally use for changing and resting between scenes. Their quick costume changes instead took place in a small alcove separated from the main seating area by a wall. Martin found that “[i]t was unconventional, but… it worked.”  

Each cast member was very involved in the costume design. Puglia found that people were eager to figure out what would work best for their characters and “[a] lot of people came up with their own ideas for their costumes and their costume changes, so it was really cool to see what people did with that. People definitely got creative, and it turned out really well.” 

Beringer, who wore an adhesive mustache for one of her roles, disclosed that “[t]he mustache was falling off, but that honestly made it more fun.” She enjoyed finding the humor in the unexpected moments, like performing with a half-glued mustache, that arose throughout the back-to-back performances, and shared that “[i]t was a comedy, so… if you have to do improv at any point, there’s always a way to make it fun because it’s just, at the end of the day, we’re just having fun.” 

Various members of the cast credited the high audience turnout and success of the event in part to the College’s supportive atmosphere. Beringer expressed that “[s]omething so great about Colby is just how close knit and supportive everyone is,” and was eager to applaud “the culture at Colby of supporting each other’s art.” Catie Corkery `28 said, “The community and the collaboration, especially for this show, were… really cool to experience.” 

Building community that is supportive and uplifting is important to the College, and it is also a core aspect of Powder & Wig. The club was founded in 1926, when the men’s and women’s theater groups decided to join together, creating a new group that welcomed all. Next year, the entirely student-run club will celebrate its hundredth anniversary. Puglia noted, “Students have been doing this and keeping this going for so long.” The club’s endurance indicates the passion and dedication of its many generations of members.

Powder & Wig has been a very meaningful part of many students’ experiences here at the College. Beringer has appreciated “having an outlet at Colby to do theater in a super chill environment with a bunch of super talented people.” For Martin, the community has sealed the deal, and she asserted that “everyone [she’s] met [in Powder & Wig], [she’s] had a good experience with.” Puglia was able to explore an entirely new facet of her creativity through her involvement with the club. She said, “Doing Powder & Wig was the first time I’ve ever had, like, speaking roles in plays.” She is now the club’s president. 

In Puglia’s experience, the accessible nature of Powder & Wig has been one of the club’s strengths. She made a point to extend an invitation to everyone in the College community, “Even if you have no theater experience or no directing experience or no tech experience, you can come be a part of Powder & Wig… If people want to get involved, they can definitely reach out to us. We’re always looking for show submissions, for people who want to act and do tech.”

Careful observers may have noticed that the publicity for the dinner described it as the “First Annual” Murder Mystery Dinner, implying intent to host this event yearly. Puglia said only that it’s “something [they’ll] look into doing again for sure.” 

Whether or not another Murder Mystery Dinner ever graces the stage of Foss Dining Hall, this foray into the world of dinner theater was certainly a rousing success for Powder & Wig. Congratulations are owed to the director, the actors, and the many other members of the College community who contributed effort and enthusiasm every step of the way.

 

 

~ Anna Izquierdo `29

A panel of entrepreneurs and industry specialists recently shared their expertise during the Founders’ Forum speaker series, focusing on the fundamental challenge facing every new company: successfully acquiring its first customer and maintaining sustained growth. The discussion, hosted by the Halloran Lab for Entrepreneurship, brought together perspectives from management consulting, major technology firms, and high-growth startups to provide students with a practical roadmap for moving from an initial idea to market presence.

The panel consisted of three speakers with extensive experience in scaling businesses: Drew McKechnie `04, an Entrepreneur in Residence at the Halloran Lab and a Global Lead at Google Cloud; Lawrence Patrizio `17, a technology entrepreneur and founder of the AI platform Srva; and Sylvia LePoidevin, a marketing executive who has helped build two technology startups to significant valuations. The conversation centered on the necessity of prioritizing market validation and customer needs over internal enthusiasm about a new product.

The speakers consistently stated that true success is not dependent on technical complexity but on solving a specific, clearly defined problem for a customer. Patrizio, drawing on his background in corporate sales and entrepreneurship, stressed the need for customer empathy. He explained that a founder must first acquire a complete understanding of the customer’s reality and their existing difficulties before committing resources to developing a solution.

LePoidevin agreed, noting that a frequent reason for company failure is launching a product based on internal belief without validating genuine market demand. She argued that the focus must always remain on the customer’s ultimate objective: the problem they face and the current, often inadequate, methods they use to solve it. Successful companies are those that design a better, more efficient path to that desired end state. She strongly advised entrepreneurs to avoid ignoring negative customer feedback and resist the impulse to launch products solely based on the team’s own excitement.

McKechnie added that the most valuable opportunities are often found not in popular or crowded fields like social media, but in “boring” or underserved industries that have yet to fully adopt modern technology. He suggested that business sectors characterized by overly complex or inefficient processes offer the greatest potential for new solutions that deliver significant customer value and achieve high returns.

The discussion shifted to the role of artificial intelligence in reshaping the entrepreneurial landscape. Patrizio, whose work centers on AI accessibility, described the technology as a “major equalizer.” He highlighted that tools now readily available to a small team of founders were previously restricted to major corporations, allowing small ventures to achieve results that once required extensive staffing and capital.

The panelists urged students to build tangible AI proficiency. They recommended showcasing competency through portfolio projects that apply AI to solve a practical problem, arguing that this hands-on application provides more value than simply claiming general familiarity with the technology. LePoidevin specifically identified content creation, including image, video, and text generation, as an area where AI has become essential for small marketing teams seeking efficiency. She also observed that organizations seeking AI solutions are frequently driven by the goal of reducing costs, which creates a high demand for consultancies and specialists capable of delivering immediate efficiency improvements.

The speakers detailed the essential psychological components necessary for navigating startup life. LePoidevin, who experienced the growth of her company from its early stages, described the startup experience as inherently unpredictable. She outlined a necessary mindset for success in this environment, which included three core habits. First, a founder must be disciplined in prioritization, accepting that limited resources mean many good ideas must be delayed or abandoned. Second, resilience is vital; the ability to bounce back quickly from setbacks is essential, requiring learning from failure and adapting the plan. Third, setting aside time for reflection helps prevent burnout and ensures the focus remains on the core business problem, rather than merely responding to daily crises.

McKechnie added that feelings of “imposter syndrome,” the sense of being unqualified despite objective success, often accompany professional growth. He suggested that such feelings can actually be an indicator of progress, as a founder’s outward success may surpass their internal self-assessment.

A student asked for advice on how to structure a self-introduction during an interview to maximize its impact, especially when transitioning from a liberal arts background into a technical or business role. Patrizio stressed the need for specificity in the response. He advised students to move beyond general statements about soft skills. Instead, he recommended they reference specific tools used, quantify the results of their work, and describe the exact business outcomes they helped achieve, keeping the pitch focused and concise, ideally under three minutes.

The panelists concluded by stating that entrepreneurial success depends not on following a single prescribed path, but on developing a constant habit of adaptability, deep customer understanding, and personal drive. They encouraged students to use the creative problem-solving and analytical abilities gained from their liberal arts education to identify and solve the high-value problems that others frequently overlook.

 

 

~ Stephen Owusu Badu `27