Deficit Hawks Show That Their Principles Only Apply To Democrats

The most recent election hopefully killed the myth of the principled evangelical voter once and for all. That supposedly "christian" group voted overwhelmingly for a lying, sexual abusing, foul-mouthed adulterer without any problem at all. The reality is that evangelicals are strictly a single-issue voter and the issue is abortion.

Now let's hope this latest Republican budget puts to rest once and for all the myth of the principled conservative deficit-hawk. Kevin Drum has provided the visuals for the projected 10 year deficits under the GOP's latest budget proposal.

All told, this will add nearly $10 trillion in additional national debt, an increase of over 50% on the current debt. This comes after years of Republicans raging about Obama exploding the national debt and refusing to employ traditional Keynesian stimulus to combat the greatest financial crisis since the Great Depression that GOP laissez-faire economics created. Of course, the reason the deficit was exploding was because the automatic stabilizers that kick in so that recessions don't become depressions actually kicked in. And, as Krugman points out, now that the economy looks like it is nearly back on its feet with something near full employment, it is exactly not the time for a massive new government stimulus. Now, if you've read other pieces on my blog, you will know I am not a deficit hawk. There is still plenty of room for deficit spending. The issue is that we needed it eight years ago or four years ago or two years ago. We probably don't need it so much now.

The much ballyhooed Freedom Caucus who supposedly were the true hardcore fiscal conservatives took less than a week to cave on their mythical "principles" and agree that deficits and the national debt only matter when Democrats are in power. David Schweikert commented, "I just came to understand all the different ideas about where we go next". Now there's a man of principle. Rep. Brian Babin had this to say, "I’d like to see a replacement on Obamacare pretty quick. Would I like to see [the budget] balance? Certainly. Absolutely. I’ve got 13 grandchildren, and I don’t want to see them buried under $30 trillion of debt." He may not want to see his grandchildren buried under a mountain of debt but apparently that is the sacrifice that must be made in order to strip away health insurance from 30 million Americans. Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows put it all in perspective, saying, "The real question is: Does it change the top line number on what we’re spending? Does it increase spending — or does it become a vehicle that maintains our current spending levels and allows us to repeal" Obamacare. For Meadows, it's apparently not enough to just deny health insurance to 30 million Americans. The savings in government spending created by Obamacare must also be eliminated.

The hypocrisy of Republicans these days is simply astounding. They will say or do anything to stay in power. They may call themselves principled evangelicals. They may call themselves principled deficit hawks. They may call themselves patriots. They may call themselves principled conservatives. But the only principles they really believe in are making sure you don't have health insurance by repealing Obamacare; that women know their place in the world and are not allowed to control their own bodies; that getting old means living in poverty and dying early by privatizing Medicare and cutting Social Security; and that their rich cronies get massive tax cuts and only get richer.

Now I'm pretty sure that Pete Peterson and his astroturf organization Fix The Debt is all over this, decrying this explosion of fiscal irresponsibility. But no, a look at their website shows no real reaction at all, only a headlines that says, "Trump Will Have To Contend With Rising Debt". But that story is based on the projections under President Obama and has no discussion of this latest GOP budget proposal. The real headline should be "Trump Will Increase Debt 50%". But we get nothing. And that's because Pete Peterson really wants to see Medicare and Social Security rolled back and raging about the debt is his way to get there. Of course, his "independent" group managed to get four questions about the debt and solvency of Social Security asked during the Presidential and Vice-Presidential debates.

Hopefully, this latest act of total hypocrisy by the Republicans on deficits will end the media obsession with that particular view. If we ever have to read another article about principled deficit hawks again, the reporter should be fired.