We have yet to hear either presidential candidate talk much about the rapidly growing national debt (now nearly 20 TRILLION dollars! – Not including unfunded liabilities of social security and medicare), so we can only assume it’s really not much of a priority for either one of them.
We already know that Hillary will be as fiscally irresponsible as every other progressive Democrat, but it’s not likely that Donald Trump would be a much better steward of our tax dollars. And it appears that both favor an ever-larger, all-powerful federal leviathan.
In fact, when it comes to infrastructure, Trump has pledged to double Clinton’s proposed spending ~
It is easy to forget that bad policy ideas aren’t limited to one particular political party. Recently, Hillary Clinton proposed $275 billion in infrastructure spending over five years and $225 billion in loan programs through a national infrastructure bank. Not one to be outdone, Donald Trump pledged to double Clinton’s proposed spending, saying in an interview with Fox Business, “We need much more money to rebuild our infrastructure.”
As it stands now, neither candidate is looking at other ways to address our country’s infrastructure by empowering states to prioritize projects based on their needs, without the influence of bureaucrats and special interests. The top-down, federally-driven approach to infrastructure will be preserved.
Adam Brandon at RedState discusses a win-win conservative alternative; putting responsibility for infrastructure where it belongs – in the hands of the states ~
If presidential candidates are truly looking for real solutions that break from the status quo and change the business-as-usual mentality that afflicts Washington, they should embrace the Transportation Empowerment Act, a bicameral bill introduced by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.).
The Transportation Empowerment Act (TEA), H.R. 2716 and S. 1541, gradually removes the influence of federal bureaucrats who serve as a middleman between the federal government and states. The bill would also reduce the federal gas tax over five years, retaining only enough tax to maintain the existing interstate system.
The TEA gives the states control of transportation decisions: what to build, how to build it, and how much gas tax to charge. Eliminating this layer of federal bureaucracy would save money, speed up projects, and ensure that projects are approved based on what the states know is needed rather than the dictates of Washington bureaucrats.
Great proposal. Unfortunately, judging from the two candidates the people have selected for the presidential race, it doesn’t appear that Americans are much interested in slowing the growth of the federal government any time soon.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As an aside, it’s rather telling that this story received very few comments when posted on Free Republic. The site’s new credo must be “if it reflects badly on the Donald we don’t want to hear it.” Or else they’re all statists now too….
Actually – I just checked the link and it’s even worse! The thread was pulled. Dissent will not be tolerated!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Related:
Up-Dated: 9-1-16 Added ~ Free Trade Under Siege in Both Parties’ Platforms Protectionism views international trade as a zero-sum game and fosters cronyism, but Trump is promoting it almost as enthusiastically as the Democrats.
