Connect with us

Economy

Why the GOP refuses to cut spending while cutting taxes

Published

on

Cut Spending

Kevin D. Williamson over at National Review made an important point about spending cuts and tax cuts. To sum it up with five of his words, “They could have done both.”

The Republicans are attempting to put together an aggressive tax cut package. From cutting the corporate tax nearly in half to dropping the number of brackets down to three or four, this is an ambitious plan that will likely score points for them in the midterm elections if they’re able to pass it. That’s not a guarantee at this point, but unless they cross some of the red lines drawn by the House Freedom Caucus or conservatives in the Senate, they’ll get it done. They have to. Failure on this front will demonstrate their complete impotence with full control of the legislative and executive branches in DC.

As a fiscally conservative American, I’m both rooting for this to pass and cringing over the fact that it probably will. I’m rooting for it because a cut is a cut. We’re overtaxed and any relief would be appreciated. I’m cringing over the possibility of it passing for three reasons:

  1. It’s still a bad progressive tax. We need tax reform, not just progressive tax cuts. Whether it’s a fair tax, neutral tax, flat tax, or any of a dozen other aggressive tax reform proposals, there are ways to get the nation out of this horribly convoluted system.
  2. No significant spending cuts. If ever there was a glaring reason for limited-government-minded people to ditch the GOP, their unwillingness to dramatically cut spending dramatically. They just passed a budget that’s bigger than all but one of the budgets passed in President Obama’s terms. The GOP needs to come out and admit they’re no longer the fiscally conservative party they continue to claim to be.
  3. The cuts aren’t as aggressive as they’re being billed. We’ll know more once the actual bill comes to light, but much of the buzz surrounding these cuts indicate we’re not really seeing an across-the-board set of tax breaks. They won’t guarantee that some middle-class Americans won’t actually end up paying more. They haven’t gone into detail about which business tax breaks they’re eliminating in favor of a lower standard rate. We have an opportunity to cut taxes so deeply that no American or business ends up paying more, but to do this we’d need the significant spending cuts I mentioned above. Instead, this is seeming more and more like a cut on paper that’s designed to be a win rather than real reform and substantial cuts that are intended to save everyone money.

With these three things in mind, let’s answer the main question: Why does the GOP refuse to cut spending while cutting taxes? The answer is simple.

Spending cuts allegedly lose elections

There’s a myth in DC that has been playing on repeat for over a century. It’s a myth that is readily acknowledged when Democrats meet. When Republicans meet, they only mention it in hushed tones so as not to blow their cover. The myth is this: if you cut spending, you’ll lose the next election.

Government programs are popular. Cutting them is not. Government agencies and departments employee many Americans. Cutting the budgets of these agencies and departments so they’re forced to let go of employees is not a popular move. Giving people something for nothing is an easy way to win votes. Forcing people to do things in order to receive their entitlements is an easy way to lose votes. These are the “facts” of life in Washington DC.

Here’s the problem. We can still call it all a myth because it’s never really been put to the test. Ronald Reagan was the last president to attempt to cut government but, despite the love that conservatives often shower on him, was really only able to slow the growth. Calvin Coolidge was arguably the last president to make net cuts in government during his tenure. Otherwise, every Congress and every President since the turn of the 20th century has utilized more programs, growing agencies, and expanding departments to “fix” America and “help” Americans.

Tax cuts are popular. Spending cuts are not… at least that’s what nearly every politician seems to think.

If the myth holds up, we will have a perpetually growing federal government. It’s already much bigger than the Constitution allows. How can we continue to let it grow? The answer to that question is also simply: we can’t. Unfortunately, too many Americans are stuck in the two-party mentality. Some anti-Republicans (also called Democrats) are actually opposed to expanding government but can’t support the GOP for other reasons. Most anti-Democrats (also called Republicans) are clearly opposed to expanding government but are unable to see past the “lesser of two evils” argument that falsely assumes the Republicans will grow government more slowly than the Democrats. The last 9 months of complete Republican control should debunk that notion.

Where does that leave us? If both major parties are too afraid of losing elections to make real spending cuts and limit government, what’s the solution? It comes down to breaking the two-party system. This is why I co-founded the Federalist Party in the first place. If both major parties refuse to limit DC, then someone needs to step up and replace them. They can’t be fixed from within. They must both lose their majorities before they’ll be willing to do the necessary cuts.

Christian, husband, father. EIC, NOQ Report. Co-Founder, the Federalist Party. Just a normal guy who will no longer sit around while the country heads in the wrong direction.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

Video: You’re Not A Liberal!

Published

on

By

A Truth Revolt Original from Bill Whittle that succinctly explains why Leftists aren’t Liberal.

Published on Oct 10, 2014

The 4:20 minute mark in the 6 minute video has its most important point:

The founding fathers were the True Liberals because they believed in Liberty – with both words having the same origins.

They believed in individual Liberty, private property, limited government and the common sense civil rights of free-speech and armed self-defence. They believed in the freedom to be left alone.

The point of the video is that the collectivists of the nation’s Socialist-Left do not meet the definition of the word Liberal. They believe in collective rights, Collective ownership of property, unlimited government, limitations on speech and gun confiscation.

Those of that mindset (Leftists) are not Liberal by any stretch of the imagination.

Continue Reading

Economy

On corn dogs and continuing resolutions

Published

on

Confession: I was a fat kid.

You don’t need to know how fat, but it was enough that my mom had to establish strict limits on how much of any given food I could eat per meal, and I couldn’t surpass that amount without her express permission.

My family well remembers one such occasion when I was maybe seven years old where I got a little, shall we say, excessive.

I had maxed out for the day on my allotted two corn dogs — my favorite food at the time — but I was still hungry. My mom wasn’t home, so I asked my dad if I could have two more corn dogs.

He approved and I had two more, but I still wasn’t satisfied, so I asked my dad again if I could have two more corn dogs, which he authorized, and so on.

All told, I ended up consuming eight jumbo corn dogs in one meal. And I felt fantastic.

In fairness to my dad, given that each of my requests couldn’t have come more than five minutes apart (I tend to inhale my food), he probably thought I was referring to the same two additional corn dogs each of the three times I petitioned his consent.

Moreover, when my mom found out, there wasn’t much that could be done; I had clearly overeaten, but I hadn’t technically disobeyed procedure.

Believe it or not, congressional budgeting is a lot like an overweight seven-year-old downing corn dogs.

Periodically, despite gouging the American people trillions of dollars already, Congress runs out of money, maxing out on its corn dog limit, as it were. Congress is then faced with two options: 1) a continuing resolution, wherein the legislature passes an appropriations bill and thereby authorizes government funding at the same levels as previously established by that year’s budget until either a specified date or a regular appropriations bill is passed; or 2) a government shutdown until appropriations can be passed.

Since October, when the 2018 fiscal year began, we have seen four continuing resolutions from Congress, two of which materialized only after a government shutdown — the most recent one occurring early Friday morning for approximately eight hours.

This means that Congress has eaten its two corn dogs and gone back to ask for two more corn dogs four times in the last four months. They have now consumed ten corn dogs, which is even more than a certain hefty seven-year-old.

The latest continuing resolution, which put an end to Friday’s blink-and-you’ll-miss-it shutdown, outlines two years of spending and absolutely blows out the deficit to the tune of $1.2 trillion. And while it’s true that the continuing resolution only extends to March 23 in order to allow for time to iron out all the details, the legislature has bypassed any threat of government shutdown or continuing resolution in the near future.

You see, the traditional two options listed above — a resolution or a shutdown — only trigger due to the debt ceiling, which prohibits spending past a certain point without specific authorization from Congress, who holds the power of the purse. But what would happen if that limit didn’t exist? The government could spend whatever it wanted with or without a budget, with or without a deficit, and with or without any accountability to the American people. Essentially, it means Congress can write itself a blank check.

Unsurprisingly, Congress has vied for this third option, suspending the debt limit until March 2019 in order to free up legislators to focus on reelection in 2018 and avoid the negative publicity of a government shutdown. To avoid a shutdown, Congress has made itself too big to fail.

And that means that no matter which issues arise, be it DACA, welfare, military, education, or healthcare, Congress will undoubtedly take advantage of its liberty to spend-up the wazoo.

Where there is no accountability, there is no progress. After all, once you grant the obese seven-year-old inexhaustible access to unlimited Foster Farms jumbo corn dogs, he’s not getting any skinnier.

Richie Angel is a Co-Editor in Chief of The New Guards. Follow him and The New Guards on Twitter, and check out The New Guards on Facebook.

Continue Reading

Economy

The GOP: The Party of Fiscal Conservatives?

Published

on

The GOP, led by President Trump, recently passed the most massive tax reform bill in decades. One of the biggest pieces of that bill dropped the corporate tax rate down to 21% from 35%, which had previously given the United States the largest corporate tax in the industrialized world. So cutting this tax and cutting individual taxes was a job well done for fiscal responsibility. It was a CRITICAL first step, but it was only a first step.

The second step was to cut the bloated federal budget. Last night’s budget deal not only failed to do this but in fact increased spending to the deficit levels of the Obama and Bush eras. Liberals claim this is due to the tax cuts, but Senator Rand Paul demonstrated clearly that this has to do entirely with the expensive high Congress gets from spending taxpayer money as well as placing an unconscionable burden on our children.

Republicans made a big to do about deficits and the debt while Barack Obama’s was in power, even coming up with the sequester during the latter half of the Obama Presidency. However, now that they control both houses of Congress and with Trump in the White House, they suddenly have no inclination to cut spending.

“When the Democrats are in power, Republicans appear to be the conservative party, But when Republicans are in power, it seems there is no conservative party. The hypocrisy hangs in the air and chokes anyone with a sense of decency or intellectual honesty,” said Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) who attempted to block the bill last night.

Others in the party also demonstrated their displeasure at the lack of leadership by the GOP on this issue. Missouri Senate Candidate Austin Petersen’s campaign released this statement:

“The spending deal approved late last night, and supported by both Missouri Senators McCaskill and Blunt, was an absolute travesty. The American people are already $20 trillion in debt, and the deficit for the current fiscal year is estimated to be an additional $1 trillion. This is just plain nuts! And it’s a great example of why Austin is in this Senate race: because like many Missourians, he’s sick and tired of sending politicians to Washington who, break their promises. The truth is we don’t just need another Republican elected to the United States Senate — we need a true constitutional and FISCAL conservative — someone who’s going to stick to their guns, stick to their principles, and most importantly, keep their promises. “

Konstantinos Roditis, Republican candidate for California State Controller said, “Hope of a budget with a modicum of fiscal responsibility from D.C. is laughable. The likelihood a fiscally responsible budget will see the light of day in D.C. is as likely as Trump winning California in a landslide in 2020. Here is a perfect example why I say, I’m a Conservative that happens to be a Republican, instead of a Republican that happens to be a Conservative.”

California GOP Senator candidate Erin Cruz had this to say… Those in the House and Senate work for the American people and should put forth a fiscally responsible budget, one which does not put an undue burden on the taxpayer and future generations. Heavy cuts should be made in the area of foreign aid, as well as pet deals congressional members tuck into these bills known as pork. The taxpayer is the boss and they want big change in government, namely reduction in size and scope of government as well as cuts to unnecessary spending. The budget passed is not reflective of what the American people voted into office. Actual change is coming, patriots like myself are standing up to the call to serve the people, there will be a big turn in how D.C. operates. Americans live by budgets and within their means, Congress should as well. Midterms can’t come soon enough for all Americans. Americans must push for a high turn out at the polls this year.

A disappointment for many conservatives is that standard-bearer Ted Cruz (R-TX) “reluctantly” voted for the spending bill, giving away any credibility he might have in the future on this issue. It should be noted that Cruz has filibustered spending in the past, famously reading to his children from the Senate floor.

In stark contrast, there was no surprise that the other Texas Senator, John Cornyn, was vocal about his annoyance with Rand Paul’s efforts to derail the budget process, saying this was an “emergency” while failing to make mention Congress hasn’t had a non-emergency spending effort in years.

It would be easy for some to lay the blame for all this on the self-proclaimed “king of debt,” President Trump. However, those who have actually read the Constitution know the power of the budget comes from Congress. Sure, Trump could lead a bit more on this issue, but at no point has Trump ever made over-spending a priority.

Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI), who is the former chairman of the House Budget Committee, seems most to blame. Of all people he should know how to cut spending, and yet has failed to do so.

The political fallout will likely be negligible. The average American, when asked, will say they are concerned about the debt, but often not enough to change their vote. And so both major parties keep passing this issue back and forth like a hot potato. The party that will be hurt by the debt is whoever is in power when the economy comes crashing down due to debt. Time will tell on that one.

A couple of months ago I wrote about how we can’t afford our sacred cows, including increased defense spending, and yet we’re increasing defense spending through the roof. You can refer back to it here.

The thing I can tell you for certain is we can’t keep doing what we’re doing. Spending on credit will eventually lead to default as more and more of our budget is eaten up by paying interest on our debt and it leases to Greek-style austerity. We need new leadership with ACTUAL fiscal conservatives.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.