Has the GOP become the party of big government? President Ronald Reagan said it best: “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” As one who worked on Reagan’s 1980 presidential campaign and subsequently in his administration, I always thought that philosophy, at least domestically, along with across-the-board tax cuts, really defined the differences between the Republican and the Democrat parties, or more more succinctly, between conservatives and liberals.
After the debacle of President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society programs, and frankly, Presidents Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter’s expansion of the federal government, Reagan was swept into office defeating an incumbent. He almost immediately made good on his promise of across-the-board tax cuts for the working families of America. The cuts stimulated an economic recovery, which continued well into the 1990s.
However, a Democratic Congress that refused to cooperate when it became time to cut the size of bureaucracy hamstrung Reagan’s administration. Reagan once quipped, “We have long since discovered that nothing lasts longer than a temporary government program.” Perhaps no truer statement was ever uttered.
Now, fast forward to President Bill Clinton’s State of the Union speech Jan. 23, 1996. Taking a page out of Reagan’s playbook, Clinton said in that speech, “We know big government does not have all the answers. We know there’s not a program for every problem. We have worked to give the American people a smaller, less-bureaucratic government in Washington. And we have to give the American people one that lives within its means. The era of big government is over.”
Not for a moment do I believe that Clinton was committed to reducing the size and scope of government, but politically his rhetoric was a winner for Clinton in 1996.
Since 1998 there has been, by any measure, a colossal expansion of the federal government. During that year, a temporary boon in tax collections brought the first budget surplus in more than 25 years. With the abolition of the budget deficit, the argument for budget restraint quickly lost its relevance among lawmakers and the Clinton administration. The big spenders and purveyors of pork were back in business.
By the first year of George W. Bush’s administration in 2001, the budget surplus was quickly evaporating. This happened in large part because tax revenues could no longer keep pace with runaway spending. Then, the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 necessitated increased spending on national security. Lawmakers in Congress, with the exception of a minority of conservatives, steadfastly refused to balance these new top priority costs with cuts elsewhere in the budget.
According to the Heritage Foundation, education spending surged by 78 percent from $34 billion to $58 billion. Most of the growth transpired between 2001 and 2003 as the No Child Left Behind Act was being implemented.
Before the congressional break for the holidays, a major fight erupted between conservatives in Congress and congressional leaders and the Bush administration. The fight was over the Medicare prescription benefit, which would expand the size of government. Essentially what the legislation did was to create a new unfunded entitlement.
Many conservatives argued that the Republican Party turned its back on limited government, and the absolute monopoly on the claim that the Democratic Party was the champion of big government. Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., warned his House colleagues that their vote for the Medicare prescription drug benefit would label the GOP as the party of new entitlements. Some economists argue that the bill’s colossal new spending will hasten the bankruptcy of Medicare, or that the increased spending will cause massive inflation. Further, retired employees are now the obligation of taxpayers, and the new plan will force senior citizens who have employee drug benefits into lower coverage and a more expensive government plan.
Recently, Bush released the outline of his 2004 budget, which includes accelerating income-tax reductions and numerous other tax cuts. Let’s be clear, the president deserves much credit for the tax cuts that were passed in 2003. Those tax cuts stimulated the economy, and because of the president and Republicans in Congress, families are keeping more of what they earn.
The administration’s fiscal 2004 budget calls for a 4.2 percent increase over 2003 spending levels. That is a good start, but conservatives must insist that Congress and the Bush administration do better. The national debt is inching toward $7 trillion. Belt tightening is required, and priorities must be set. To not do so would be irresponsible of the GOP, which, after all, controls both houses of Congress and the White House.