Standing Up for the Conservative Cause

Standing Up for the Conservative Cause

I want to thank the 104 patriots of the Republican Study Committee (RSC) who courageously stood for their “Back to Basics” budget this week. By proposing sweeping entitlement reforms and by limiting Obamacare, the “Back to Basics” budget would have balanced our country’s federal budget in just four years. Washington has an awful spending problem, and those Representatives who voted for the RSC budget truly recognize this fact and are willing to cast the tough votes necessary to deal with it. 

Citizens United Political Victory Fund has financially supported 49 of the 104 members of Congress who supported the RSC budget and will take this vote into account going forward. Americans need to know that these are the very men and women who are most concerned about fixing our nation’s dire financial situation.

The RSC budget sets a course for how conservatives in Congress should approach entitlement reform. Instead of funding an already-insolvent entitlement system for our aging baby-boomers, the blueprint calls for implementing Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan for insurance premium support through Medicare for those under 60 years of age, while steadily increasing the eligibility age to 70. By giving seniors a choice, and by having providers compete for their business, seniors will have better services while still reducing costs.

In addition, the budget embraced the idea of Federalism, by turning Medicaid reform over to the states in the form of block grants. What California needs and what Mississippi needs to take care of their citizens are very different. Instead of having states serve as mere administrative entities for an overwhelming federal bureaucracy, states should be able to make adjustments to best serve their citizens. Most importantly, while the budget did include some Obamacare tax levels in the baseline, it still halted the new healthcare law in its tracks by stopping the implementation in each state.

Out of the 170 members of the Republican Study Committee, 104 voted for the RSC budget, and 61 did not (five did not vote). Those sixty-one members should take a long hard look in the mirror and ask themselves if they should be members of the RSC. If you cannot vote for a budget blueprint that balances in four years, then you should probably forfeit your conservative membership card at the door. 

While the RSC budget did not pass, it sets the stage for how conservatives talk about changing the size and scope of government. In the fight for job creation and economic prosperity, conservatives have much work to do. The RSC is attempting to point America in the right direction.