Speaker Kevin McCarthy and most Republicans chose from the start to raise the debt “limit.” At the next “limit,” such people would raise it again. This only starts changing when a remnant starts voting no.
Even the Limit, Save, Grow Act of 2023 would have increased the debt “limit.” Debt would have been increased by increasing the quantity of money, which would increase inflation in later years.
There will be new chances to vote no on future increases. Each vote no would begin to create an actual debt limit.
Here’s how this would work.
Vote No to Inflation
A few more members of a current or future congress would vote no to increasing the debt “limit.” They would care about making this happen in the future, so they would explain their reasons.
They would explain that the only way to stop borrowing more is to stop borrowing more. They’d say that they’re through with forcing We the People to make cuts in our spending of our household money. It’s high time that politicians make cuts in their spending of our household money.
Actions have consequences. Ideas have power.
Once a few more politicians would vote no (showing with their actions that politicians can vote no), and explain why (showing with their ideas that politicians can explain why), voters everywhere would start deciding for themselves to vote no. No to their incumbents who wouldn’t vote no. No to new politicians who wouldn’t vote no.
These few more politicians might be members of the Freedom Caucus. A majority of Freedom Caucus members might vote internally to vote yes, or could stalemate internally. Any of these politicians who are members of the Freedom Caucus should get out.
In practice, every caucus drags its better members down to the level of its worse members who are its swing votes. Its better members hope to persuade its worse members to do better, hoping that as a group they will wield more power, better. Instead, its worse members worsen its better members’ actions and ideas. Caucuses of politicians are systemic problems, not solutions.
People understand that cutting spending is hard. Things you have been doing, you must stop doing. You only do this when the pain gets enough.
But when the pain gets enough, the challenge kicks in. Every decision about spending becomes an opportunity. Every opportunity you take reinforces the reality that actually, you and everybody around you can make changes. So you do, more and more. And things do get better—imperceptibly at first, but then each little positive change starts reinforcing the next little positive change.
For a long time, you’re still threatened, and your fear doesn’t relent. But from the start, you can celebrate each small victory. And you should.
When you celebrate, rationally, you won’t even think of pretending that each small change is the solution.
But you should celebrate that making one change after another is the solution. It’s a process. Getting the process started is everything.
Vote No to Constitution-Defiance
The same process that will create a real boundary on government people’s borrowing is the process that will create real limits on government people’s defiance of the Constitution.
Everyone knows that national-government politicians, judges, and bureaucrats don’t limit themselves to enumerated powers, don’t separate powers, and don’t use their offsetting powers against other people in government to limit them.
Growing numbers of people also get it that state-government people don’t do these things either, and county, city, and neighborhood-association government people don’t do these things either. Customers don’t manage to even limit government cronies, because government people cut out customers’ choices and customers’ legal means to defend themselves.
Voting no to Constitution defiance would begin to create actual limited governments. The same process that would create an actual debt limit would create actual limited governments.
Conservative activists who look at the Limit, Save, Grow Act of 2023 as a positive step forward are blinding themselves to the fact that by increasing debt, any such act would continue business as usual. Voting yes would further cement that process.
Every conservative politician who votes yes would be failing to create the process we need.
Every voter who votes for politicians who vote yes would be failing to require them to create the process we need.
Every vote on debt limits is a time for choosing. The best time to make a change for the better is always right away. The best change to make is always the most-complete change for the better.
Our real leaders are each politician who does what’s right and lets the chips fall where they may. And, ultimately, each voter who does the same.
Add comment