Coming off the heels of the 2008 presidential election where a putrid John McCain (honorable sailor, destructive and petulant lawmaker) lead an awful campaign, I threw in with Sarah Palin. She was accomplished, pretty, intelligent, and articulate while plain spoken. She and her family did not deserve the personal attacks from the mainstream media and others, and to this day live as one of many examples of why good people don’t run for office. So, despite the personal attacks, I predicted on many occasions that she would run for president in 2012, and win soundly. Were there a Vegas bet available, I would have put my house up as collateral.
Thankfully, I didn’t.
Election predictions where you put your reputation or money on the line are generally foolish. Anyone predicting Donald Trump would win the 2016 election was kidding themselves or lying. No one predicted a Hillary loss, which is more an apt description of what happened than a Trump win. But, win he did, and now we’re living with the results – some living better than others.
The American people are ticked off. We must at least get started on reducing the size and power of government, or the catastrophe the prepping community often predicts – EMP pulse knocking out the power grid, nuclear missile from North Korea, Yellowstone Park erupting, etc. — will come in the way of finance. Dollars are boring, but they can be equally destructive.
So we should all take some heart in witnessing what President Trump wants to do with the federal budget. Trump proposes to make substantial cuts to the following:
Environmental Protection Agency
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Small Business Administration
If you’re having an episode of the vapors, even mildly, ask yourselves what Mark Levin often asks, “How did we get along before X, or at least the massive size of X?” The answer is always “just fine.”
Some individual cuts that fall under, “Good God, what is this for?” or “Why are we paying for that?!”
o Eliminates the Fogarty International Center, which builds partnerships between U.S. and foreign health research institutions
o Eliminates the $35 million of funding for Section 4 Community Development and Affordable Housing
o Decreases funding for land acquisition by $120 million
o Cuts funding to reimburse state and local governments for costs of incarcerating certain undocumented immigrants
o Eliminates climate-change prevention programs, including pledged payments to U.N. climate-change programs
o Reduces funding for U.N. peacekeeping
o Reduces funding for development banks such as the World Bank
o Reduces most cultural-exchange programs, but keeps the Fulbright Program
o (EPA) Eliminates more than 50 programs and 3,200 jobs
o (EPA) Discontinues funding for international climate-change programs
Three of my favorites
o Eliminates all $148 million for the National Endowment for the Arts and all $148 million for the National Endowment for the Humanities
o Eliminates the $230 million Institute of Museum and Library Services
o Eliminates the $445 million for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which supports public television and radio, including PBS and NPR
There are some that need further explanation:
o Cuts almost $1 billion of funding for federal prison construction
o Shifts air traffic control outside the government
Until recently, President Trump was not a Republican. We know he’s not conservative. When we hear of Ivanka’s dream project of the Family Leave Act, when we hear President Trump speak about fair trade as if from on high he can dictate the terms of international trade, and when we see the heaping dumpster fire of the American Health Care Act, we conservatives automatically object.
Merely glancing at his proposed budget cuts (and increase in defense), and watching the reaction from the Left, we can safely say if he achieves victory in the congressional budget for half of what he proposes, President Trump will be favored to win reelection in 2020.
No predictions, but cautious optimism.