News

In the record 43-day government shutdown from October 1 to November 12, 2025, over one million federal employees were forced to work without pay. The Air Traffic Controllers, central to the air travel network, worked extensive hours amid systematic short staffing to keep our skies running. 

Federal and industry reports show that when the shutdown began, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was already short staffed by thousands of certified controllers. As a result, many were required to work overtime before the shutdown began. According to CNBC, up to “6% of flights had to be cut at 40 major airports, and 4% cuts were enacted at some of the busiest airports in the country including Atlanta International.”  The shortage highlighted by the shutdown is nothing new. It has been an issue for a number of years, with CNN reporting the FAA has been hiring “less than ⅔ of the needed controllers since 2013.” 

In order to become a controller, one must endure a rigorous training and certification process. Students must complete specific coursework and apprenticeships in the Aviation industry. According to the FAA, trainees must then “pass the Air Traffic Skills Assessment (ATSA), complete five months of sim training at the FAA Academy in Oklahoma, and then complete two years of supervised on-the-job training at an assigned ATC facility.” Many quit early into or part way through the program as the process of becoming a controller requires sacrifice and immense commitment. Aviation schools have extremely high standards as they are preparing students for the tremendous stress, pressure, and performance needed to be a successful and safe air traffic controller. According to a CNBC news report, this, coupled with the mandatory retirement age of 56, means the pool of people to fill the vacancies is very small. Over the years these scheduled retirements have decreased the number of controllers. This has further exacerbated the shortage crisis, causing most towers and radar centers to be significantly understaffed. 

The 2025 shutdown compounded the issue because controllers missed paychecks, causing them to take on additional part-time work, or tap into savings to cover living expenses. Aviation unions reported an increase in employees reporting fatigue and calling in sick. In response, the FAA cut flights. Amidst the shutdown, training projects and equipment upgrades were halted by the frozen funding which caused further long term constraints. 

After the shutdown ended there was a controversy over a $10,000 one-time “perfect attendance” bonus for the small fraction of controllers and technicians who were able to work all their shifts including overtime through the shutdown. According to PBS, a congressional committee found that only 776 out of the nearly 20,000 eligible employees received the bonuses. Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois said, “all controllers who went without pay should receive bonuses.” It hardly seemed fair given that the bonus excluded 96 percent of the workforce. Some, including the President, disagreed and thought the bonuses stood as a symbol of the enduring dedication of the very few who worked all shifts amid the shutdown. Unfortunately, controllers have found themselves in the center of a political dispute. The controllers argument centers on the basic tenants of being an employee, being compensated fairly and working reasonable hours. 

In Austin, where the runways are only becoming busier, controllers are feeling the strain. According to KUT, a controller at the Austin-Bergstrom International Airport described the workflow as “feeling like you are working three jobs in one shift.” Another felt the pressure to perform and work even when at his breaking point saying, “You show up and do it, because if you don’t, no one else will.” As the FAA continues to address staffing shortages, aviation experts warn that flight cutting will occur at a higher frequency before the situation improves.  Lawmakers have proposed new legislation that offers protections for essential federal employees during future shutdowns that include paid leave, in an attempt to avoid further controversy in future government shutdowns.

Before most Gen Z-ers could vote, they were already one of the most politically active generations. Gen Z has been active on social media from signing online petitions, joining hashtag movements, and debating in comment sections. Now, as their numbers grow, the generation shaped by social media is bringing its digitally forged political values into real-world politics. 

Gen Z presents a striking paradox: we are both more progressive and free thinking than proceeding generations, yet also have some of the most conservative young Americans in decades. This has produced intense polarization, with many Gen Z-ers identifying either on the far left or far right rather than settling somewhere in the middle. For some, radical conservatism is a reaction to what they view as extreme liberalism that they see in our generation, such as expanding gender identities, declining religious influence, and policies such as affirmative action. A study done by The New York Times states that many of these rising young conservatives are romanticizing a return to traditional values that they see their parents supporting. 

However, many Gen-Z still feel discouraged from actually voting, despite being so involved online. This is mostly seen on the far right side of things. Some Gen Z conservatives support anti-democratic approaches because they believe pluralistic democracy threatens their moral vision for the future. Yet, many young Republicans simultaneously feel alienated by the MAGA movement, unsure where they fit. On the other end of the spectrum, many liberal Gen-Zers feel discouraged from voting because no candidate fully reflects the issues they grew up with, from climate change to school shootings to the pandemic. Since so many candidates are from older generations, many Gen Z fear their voices are never fully represented in the issues we are experiencing now. Together, these issues create a generation that wants to be politically engaged, but is deeply fractured, unlike anything older Americans experienced. 

Social media is one example of an incredibly polarized space that Gen Z is actively part of. Social media algorithms intensify this division by feeding young people content that reinforces whatever worldview they already have.  I interviewed many students at our school who are involved with political clubs and programs, such as Texas Youth and Government club and Model UN, as well as students who wanted their voice to be heard on this topic, as it is a subject that many Gen Z have observed as they gear up to vote. Gracie Edwards, who wants to study law in college and is very involved with the TYAG club, commented on the role of social media in her politics: “I think maybe social media would give me a broad range of viewpoints if I searched it, but my feed is mostly just my own beliefs….it has definitely made me more involved with politics, just seeing so much more news,” she stated. She isn’t alone in the feeling that social media widely reinforces what the viewer already believes. 

As many members of our community become of age to vote, it is imperative they are educated on politics outside of polarized social media algorithms. Senior Vince Vegas, leader of the Texas Youth and Government Club, informed me that he “lead[s] students through how to write legislative bills and how to properly debate them in a legislative setting.” They “take on the role of someone in the House of Representatives or the Senate and get to basically walk in the shoes of the people who make laws for Texas.” This kind of authority is very beneficial for Gen-Z to get a broad range of perspectives from all over our student body.  Additionally, in the legislature, parties are forced to work together and compromise. But what does our student body actually care about? Vegas states that “a lot of bills in the conferences [are] about getting more youth involvement in politics by setting age caps on elected official positions.” 

Katie Crosswell, who has spent many years involved with Model UN, stated that “seeing debates online and contesting my views with others on the internet” makes her more involved with politics. Crosswell also told me that she has changed or altered her political beliefs because of something she saw on social media:  “Social media has made me more aware and understanding of views that differ from my own. One example of this is debates about free or reduced healthcare because I used to think that taxes would be much too high but after reading about other countries that have free healthcare and how much it would benefit the American people my opinions have changed”. Croswell also had a different take on how social media made her involved, stating that “being able to hear intelligent people's responses to what is happening around the world has kept me informed.” This introduces a new idea, that social media may actually be benefiting Gen Z politics, as it offers a broad range of perspectives from all over the world, and provides for loads of information at your fingertips.