Sunday, March 19, 2017

The Unsettling Effect of An Un-Subtle President

Say what you will about the negative personal aspects of Donald Trump, conservatives are generally pleased with the Administration’s policy pronouncements, from a budget tilted strongly towards national defense to stern warnings to North Korea.

As is the president’s manner, there was nothing conciliatory or placating in his budgetary assault on liberal favorites.  As examples, money for the National Endowment for the Arts was eliminated entirely as was funding for a preschool breakfast program which had not been shown to result – as backers had claimed – in improved school performance.

The howls of protest from the left were seemingly heard from coast to coast … “no compassion”, “enemy of culture” and so forth.

My, My, My!  How the role of the federal government has changed in nearly two hundred and thirty years since it was supposedly constrained by the U.S. Constitution.

Where is it written that the Federal Government should provide money for theater productions?  If private funding isn’t available, why should tax payers foot the bill?  And if a program does not produce desired results, why shouldn’t be money for it be cut off?

Of course, arts can be supported by those who patronize them and hungry children should get breakfast.  But why are these tasks federal responsibilities?  What about state, localities and private sources?  It’s as if the general Washington consensus – often accommodated by Republicans  afraid of liberal disapproval - is being upended.  Is it no longer true that when there is a perceived need or problem, only Washington can solve it?

And think about national security:  the President, the Commander in Chief, has no greater role than to provide for the common defense.  Simply put, if the nation does not survive nothing else does either (like food aid programs).  Yet, under the Obama Administration, Congressional Democrats and Republicans agreed to a budget sequestration program putting domestic and military expenditures on an equal footing.  In effect, defense needs were treated as just another interest group vying with, say, the EPA for a limited pool of federal money.


The absence of sensible priorities is just the sort of foolishness that led to Trump’s popularity.

No comments:

Post a Comment