If Republicans Want To Extend Trump’s Tax Cuts, They Should Cut Spending To Do It
The supply-side approach can yield economic growth — but it gives politicians an excuse not to reduce disastrous government spending.
Senate Republicans fed up with former President Donald Trump are increasingly airing their grievances publicly.
Over the weekend, Trump was accused of calling for the termination of the U.S. Constitution after demanding the results of the 2020 presidential election be thrown out.
"Do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution," Trump said on Saturday. "Our great ‘Founders’ did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!"
Trump was already under a microscope in Republican circles after Trump-endorsed personalities either lost or narrowly won contests in the 2022 midterm elections, compared to moderate Republicans who won easily.
If three consecutive losing elections were not enough, Republicans further distanced themselves from Trump after his controversial dinner with rapper Kanye West. Now, dismissing the Constitution has Republicans directly speaking out against Trump and his 2024 ambitions.
"I’m at a loss for words. We need to move on," Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) told Politico, explaining that Trump's 2024 prospects are "increasingly less likely, given statements like that."
"The facts of the election in 2022 are just indisputable. The ultra, pro-Trump, handpicked by Trump, based on loyalty to Trump? Those candidates wildly underperformed," explained Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.). "It’s pretty clear that he’s become a toxic force and that’s going to diminish his influence a lot."
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), who, like Toomey, is retiring from politics, said, "People in my party have to decide: Do they want to keep giving oxygen to somebody who is trying to sell tickets to his own proprietary circus, or do they want to be a constitutional party that has a clear agenda."
"Well, I think you take an oath to the Constitution, you don’t take it provisionally," Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said, NBC News reported. "And I can’t imagine that a former president would make that statement."
Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, meanwhile, said on Tuesday, "I completely disagree with his comment."
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, moreover, suggested that Trump's comments are prima facie disqualifying for the presidency.
"Let me just say, anyone seeking the presidency who thinks that the Constitution could somehow be suspended or not followed, it seems to me would have a very hard time being sworn in as president of the United States," McConnell said.
The former president defended himself from accusations that he called for the termination of the Constitution.
"The Fake News is actually trying to convince the American People that I said I wanted to 'terminate' the Constitution. This is simply more DISINFORMATION & LIES," Trump claimed Monday.
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Penn.) responded to attacks from comedian Jon Stewart on Sunday, setting the record straight over Republican opposition to a veteran's health care bill.
Stewart lashed out at Republican lawmakers last week for initially blocking the PACT Act, legislation that would expand health care services for veterans exposed to toxic burn pits.
"I'm used to the lies...I'm used to the hypocrisy…I'm used to the lies...I'm used to the cowardice...I'm used to all of it, but I am not used to the cruelty," Stewart said in a viral speech last week.
Stewart has continued his campaign against Republicans in the days since his speech, specifically targeting Toomey and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) despite each lawmaker explaining they support the substance of the PACT Act, but oppose handing the government another blank check.
Speaking on CNN's "State of the Union," Toomey explained that Democrats are trying to pull the wool over Americans' eyes — and they're using Stewart to force Republican lawmakers to accept it.
"This is the oldest trick in Washington," Toomey began
"People take a sympathetic group of Americans — and it could be children with an illness, it could be victims of crime, it could be veterans who've been exposed to toxic chemicals — craft a bill to address their problems, and then sneak in something completely unrelated that they know could never pass on its own and dare Republicans to do anything about it," he continued, "because they know they will unleash their allies in the media and maybe a pseudo- celebrity to make up false accusations to try to get us to just swallow what shouldn't be there."
Toomey explains why he voted against bill to help vets exposed to toxic burn pits www.youtube.com
When host Jake Tapper raised a common objection to Toomey's point — that Republicans supported the same bill earlier this year — Toomey disclosed that Republicans were promised they would have the opportunity to draw up amendments.
But, according to Toomey, that promise "was reneged on."
"Let me be very clear: Republicans are not opposed to any of the substance of the PACT Act," Toomey explained. "My honest Democratic colleagues will fully acknowledge that my objection — and if I get my way, I get my change — it will not change by one penny any spending on any veterans program.
"What I'm trying to do is change a government accounting methodology that is designed to allow our Democratic colleagues to go on an unrelated $400 billion spending-spree that has nothing to do with veterans and that won't be in the veterans space," he continued.
Later in the interview, Tapper suggested that Republicans pass the bill now, and fix it later. But Toomey quickly pointed out "there's never an opportunity to fix the problems later."
"That's why they're not giving us the opportunity now. They know they can prevent us from fixing it later," Toomey explained.
Speaking after Toomey on CNN, Veteran Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough said he cannot support what Republicans want, claiming the outcome "will be rationing of care for vets."
McDonough, however, provided zero evidence showing that if the government does not get another massive discretionary spending fund that VA health care — which is notoriously bad already — will be forced to ration services.
Meanwhile, Stewart responded to Toomey's interview by mocking the Republican lawmaker.
"Morning @SenToomey I'd rather be a pseudo celeb than pseudo Senator! Take your amendment vote at the same 60 threshold Veterans had to hit...Good luck capping and rationing care!!!!!" Stewart wrote on Twitter.