The national debt hit $22 trillion this week. You won’t find many in either major party who think this is a healthy development.
But isn’t part of the reason people vote Republican because that party presents itself as fiscally responsible compared to Democrats?
For as long as the debt has grown, Republicans have been promising to stop it. Yet, in 1981 the national debt topped $1 trillion after former President Ronald Reagan’s first year. When former President George H.W. Bush left office in 1993, it was more than $4 trillion. His son, former President George W. Bush, would push it past $10 trillion.
Of course, Democrats were just as responsible for exploding the debt. President Barack Obama became the biggest government spender in world history, leaving office with an almost $20 trillion national debt.
That is, until our current Republican president outdid Obama in spending. When asked about a looming debt crisis in December, President Trump replied, “I won’t be here.” To his credit, Trump has shown some spending concerns, like his call for every agency to reduce operations by 5 percent in October.
But has anyone in Washington actually cut spending?
Yes, and not surprisingly they are all Republicans. Sadly, there’s only seven of them: Sens. Rand Paul R-Ky. and Mike Lee R-Utah, and Reps. Justin Amash R-Mich., Thomas Massie, R-Ky., John Duncan Jr. R-Tenn., Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, and Morgan Griffith, R-Va.
Now, the entire list of members of Congress who voted to cut overall spending in 2018: @justinamash @RepThomasMassie @SenMikeLee @RandPaul @RepJohnDuncanJr @Raul_Labrador @RepMGriffith Really wish I couldn’t fit them all in one tweet. #FollowThem https://t.co/qM6LLPriyJ
— Stu Burguiere (@WorldOfStu) January 24, 2019
These findings are according to SpendingTracker.org, a project of the bipartisan nonprofit group the Coalition to Reduce Spending. SpendingTracker takes the annual votes of each member of Congress and measures how much is spent or cut through those votes, without exception. Amash was the biggest saver in Congress last year, voting to cut $165 billion in 2018.
But still, only seven?
The Constitution ultimately gives Congress the power of the purse. Obviously this means the only way to reduce the debt is to reduce the deficit, which will mean cutting spending.
It will also obviously take more than seven members of Congress to get the job done.
Each of the only seven members of Congress to actually cut spending can be considered libertarian-friendly or within that faction of the Republican Party.
Which begs the question, why are libertarian-leaning Republicans the only ones able to cut spending?
It comes down to philosophical consistency. Paul has pinpointed Washington’s spending problem many times as an “unholy alliance” between Republicans and Democrats, where conservatives are more willing to relent on domestic spending so long as Democrats agree to more Pentagon spending.
Dems and Republicans make an unholy alliance. Republicans get more military spending and dems get more welfare spending. We’ve got guns and butter everyone gets what they want but the tax payer.
— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) May 17, 2018
“The problem with our deficit is, if you are truly a conservative, you have to look at both the military and domestic welfare,” Paul said in 2015 while running for president. “Instead we have the opposite.”
“An unholy alliance between right and left … The right wants more military spending. The left wants more domestic. What happens? They come together and spend more on everything, that is why we are in $18 trillion in debt,” Paul said at the time.
“That is why I am the only conservative running on either side, because I am the only one willing to cut both,” he finished.
Does he not have a point? Why was Paul the only 2016 Republican presidential primary candidate on SpendingTracker’s list? Congress members and former 2016 presidential candidates Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., all claim the conservative label, but do not appear on this list. Far from it.
If the only members of Congress to cut spending last year were of a libertarian bent, does it not stand to reason that the only way out of America’s fiscal mess would be to elect a lot more libertarian-leaning representatives?
Libertarian youth activist group Young Americans for Liberty continues to work toward such a goal, racking up victories by electing mostly libertarian Republicans at the state level who could potentially run for national office in the future — leaders who might one day actually cut spending.
Electing a slew of libertarian-minded leaders could prove difficult, but not as difficult as trying to reduce America’s debt while still spending more and more with each passing year.
Jack Hunter (@jackhunter74) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is the former political editor of Rare.us and co-authored the 2011 book The Tea Party Goes to Washington with Sen. Rand Paul.
