Does Congress’s budget deal mark the end of the Tea Party?

 

That’s what Rand Paul  said on Wednesday:

 

Sen. Rand Paul, who was first elected in 2010 as a one of the original tea party candidates, declared the movement dead on Wednesday, citing a massive budget deal poised for passage Thursday.

 

“Both parties have deserted, have absolutely and utterly deserted America and show no care and no understanding and no sympathy for the burden of debt they are leaving the taxpayers, the young, the next generation, and the future of our country,” the Kentucky Republican said on the Senate floor. “The very underpinnings of our country are being eroded and threatened by this debt.”

 

The debt will now grow much larger under the bipartisan deal, which green-lights unfettered federal borrowing until July 31, 2021. The accord also busts federal spending caps, lifting them by 320 billion over the next two fiscal years. Finally, negotiators left out an extension of the 2011 Budget Control Act, which imposed the caps. It expires in two years.

 

Paul, who will vote against the deal, said it “marks the death of the tea party in America.”

 

Paul was elected in the 2010 tea party wave that promoted fiscal discipline. Congress mostly raised spending since Paul arrived, despite his efforts to try to force the chamber to employ fiscal discipline.

 

The national deficit is approaching $1 trillion, while the debt climbed to more than $22 trillion this year.

 

Paul wants to amend the legislation with extended budget caps, spending cuts, and a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget.

 

Paul is among a group of Senate conservatives who are poised to vote against the caps deal, which has already won House approval. They’ll vote “no” despite President Trump urging them to support it.

 

The measure bolsters defense spending, but it also raises domestic spending, adding up to the big increase in the caps.[….]

 

 

Brian Riedl of The Manhattan Institute, writing in National Review, comes to a similar conclusion.

 

 

Of course, the deal passed both houses of Congress and got signed by Trump:

 

[…] President Trump signed budget legislation which suspends the debt ceiling for two years Friday afternoon. The Senate passed the deal, cut between the White House and Democratic congressional leaders, on Thursday. The budget will raise spending by $324 billion and would also suspend the debt ceiling until July 2021, eliminating the prospect of an ugly battle before the 2020 election.

The bill passed the Senate on a bipartisan basis with 67 yeas to 28 nays.

 

Last week, the House passed the two-year spending and debt limit deal 284 to 149, with 219 Democrats voting in favor and 16 voting against. Sixty-five Republicans supported the measure. However, some fiscal hawks in the Republican Party opposed the bill.[…]

 

Seven of North Carolina’s Eight Republicans in the House voted NO (Patrick McHenry, of course, stuck with leadership and said YES).  This is an example of what gets counted as “voting with Trump.”

 

McHenry “voted with Trump” — according to ThomT’s favorite website http://www.fivethirtyeight.com .

 

Over in the Senate, Tillis voted NO.  (Only because the vote wasn’t close and McConnell didn’t need his vote.  And Thommy-Boy has a challenge from the right coming up in March.)  It’s a shame that it takes the threat of unemployment to get him to act right.

 

 

 

 

7 thoughts on “Does Congress’s budget deal mark the end of the Tea Party?

  1. As I see it, it’s up to the people of the TEA Party to decide if this is the end. Working within the GOP to effect change, which is what the TEA-folks tried to do, isn’t working. Perhaps it’s time to exodus to the Constitution Party to force the GOP into a parliamentary coalition without which they can’t remain in power. The price for that would be at least partial acquiescence to their TEA-CON partner’s demands for fiscal reform. I may be just spitballing here, but if conservatives want change, they’re going to have to do SOMETHING different.

  2. Realistically, the only thing that is going to stop our government from spending like drunken sailors is if the bond market can no longer sell the debt that is issued to fund it. The US will have to default on the obligations and then there will be a lot of pain. I hope the generations of the baby boomers and before are happy…they have doomed their children, grand children and all future generations of this country to some bad times.

  3. I fail to remember where I read ” unfortunately sometimes you have to fuel the beast” but I view this budget deal as maybe one of those times. The $beast$ was spawned in 1910 on Jekyl Island and hatched in 1913 in the halls of Congress. Creation of the Federal Reserve and the 16th amendment emerged from the egg.
    The genius of the FairTax needs to be revisited by Congress. The expectation of of those in Congress,that are outright power mongers, of voting themselves out of $power$ is dismal.
    Browny Douglas

  4. As a fervent fiscal conservative, I have wondered for a couple years now why $4.6Trillion is the new “norm” for U.S. budgets.
    I understand the military need for a lot of money – particularly after the Obama years. And I hear that, between the tax cuts and trade moves by President Trump, we are receiving hundreds of $Billions in return (?).
    I guess a second term for Trump might finally demonstrate some fiscal constraint. Right?

  5. The Mexican wall would be nearing completion if Rand Paul and others like the
    Freedom Caucus had used their heads, instead of their self served egos, and kept their mouths shut.

Comments are closed.