Home Opinion House Conservative Explains Why Big Beautiful Bill Was Big Ugly Spending Spree

House Conservative Explains Why Big Beautiful Bill Was Big Ugly Spending Spree

2114
2

A leading House conservative and member of the Budget Committee used his time in a committee hearing on the so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” spending package to explain that the bill does little to reform spending and the supposed spending cuts are pushed to future years, giving future congresses and the next president time to repeal them.

Texas Republican Rep. Chip Roy explained that while the bill does deliver tax relief it dramatically increases budget deficits by putting off spending reform:

“I appreciate my friend from Texas, the chairman, and you know, my Democratic colleagues keep telling things that are not true. The vast majority of Americans will get tax benefits under this bill. It’s just simply false to say that that’s not true. Hardworking Americans who will benefit from the standard deduction increase, hardworking Americans who will benefit from child tax credits and lower tax rates—stop saying things that aren’t true. Those things are true. The fact is, we have money in here for the border to undo the damage of Joe Biden. We have more money in here for defense to undo the damage of Joe Biden, but we also address Medicaid and Medicaid spending goes up. Stop lying. Medicaid spending goes up. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are profoundly unserious when it comes to being real about what’s happening with the numbers. I applaud Chairman Arrington. I applaud my colleagues on this side of the aisle for taking a step forward in dealing with the spending problem in this town.

But I have to now admonish my colleagues on this side of the aisle: this bill falls profoundly short. It does not do what we say it does with respect to deficits. The fact of the matter is, on the spending, what we’re dealing with here is tax cuts and spending a massive front-loaded deficit increase. That’s the truth. That’s the truth. Deficits will go up in the first half of the 10-year budget window. And we all know it’s true, and we shouldn’t do that. We shouldn’t say that we’re doing something we’re not doing.

The fact of the matter is, this bill has back-loaded savings and front-loaded spending, nowhere near the Senate Budget top line, by the way. The Senate Budget top line of six and a half trillion dollars, which, by the way, is what we were pre-COVID, inflation-adjusted, on interest, on Medicare and Social Security. And if we would reform Medicaid, we could actually get to the core of the problem, but we refuse to do it. And I’m not going to sit here and say that everything is hunky-dory when this is the Budget Committee. This is the Budget Committee. We are supposed to do something to actually result in balanced budgets, but we’re not doing it. Look at what happens under deficits… Only in Washington are we expected to bet on the come that in five years, everything will work, then we will solve the problem.

We have got to change the direction of this town, and to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: yes, that means touching Medicaid. It went from $400 billion in 2019 to $600 billion this year. It’ll be over a trillion in the 2030s. We are making promises that we cannot keep. We do need to reform it. We need to stop giving seven times as much money to the able-bodied over the vulnerable. Why are we sticking it to the vulnerable population, the disabled and the sick, to give money to single able-bodied male adults? We shouldn’t do that. We should reform it. But guess what? That message needs to be delivered to my colleagues on this side of the aisle too.

We are writing checks we cannot cash, and our children are going to pay the price. So I am a no on this bill unless serious reforms are made today, tomorrow, Sunday. We’re having conversations as we speak, but something needs to change, or you’re not going to get my support.”

2 COMMENTS

  1. HISTORY DOESN’T LIE! BUT POLITICIANS DO!

    “its projected $2.5 trillion increase to the federal deficit over the next decade drew fire”

    As it should have! That said, in the end, it’s a real safe bet, that it, or a reduced version, will be passed by Congress.

    History doesn’t lie! But politicians do! Case in point – Donald J. Trump who ran his campaign on a promise to reduce (even eliminate), not raise, the federal deficit.

    Had instead the constitutional framers (like their early 1600’s predecessors) established government and society on the Bible’s immutable/unchanging moral law (including its economic and taxing statutes), there would never be a deficit (if ever) for longer than seven years.

    For more on how the Bible’s triune and integral moral law (the Ten Commandments and their respective statutes and judgments) apply and should be implemented as the law of the land, see free online book “Law & Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant” at bible versus constitution dot org. Click on the top entry on our Online Book page and scroll down to Chapter 25.

    Then, at the same location, “A Biblical Constitution: A Scriptural Replacement for Secular Government.”

    See also, Chapter 25 “Amendment 16: Graduated Income Tax vs. Flat Increase Tax” of free online book “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.” Click on the top entry on our Online Book page and scroll down to Chapter 25.

    Find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the sidebar and receive a free copy of the 85-page “Primer” of “BL vs. USC.”

  2. Need Tax Cuts & Spending Reforms alone
    No Depts to fund via DOGE More funds Saved
    CUT CUT fight abuse & fraud & save $$$$

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here