Right-of-Center Child Care Plan Exposes Divide | Eastern NC Now

Samuel Gregg writes for National Review Online about a philosophical divide that animates the fight over a proposal from U.S. Sen. Mitt Romney.

ENCNow
Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the John Locke Foundation. The author of this post is Mitch Kokai.

    Samuel Gregg writes for National Review Online about a philosophical divide that animates the fight over a proposal from U.S. Sen. Mitt Romney.

  • Debates about a universal child allowance aren't usually the occasion for a war of words among politicians, commentators, and opinion writers. Yet that's precisely what happened when Senator Mitt Romney proposed legislation in early February that would involve the U.S. government sending all but America's wealthiest families $250 a month per child between six and 17 years old, and $350 a month for each child under the age of five.
  • Many social conservatives applauded the idea. Finally, they said, a senior Republican was taking seriously their concerns about Middle America's economic struggles and doing something about it.
  • Fiscal conservatives tended to be less enthusiastic. While noting that Romney's proposal would be partly funded by eliminating the child tax credit and reforming the earned-income tax credit, they maintained we need less government spending on entitlements, not more.
  • Things escalated from there. But the significance of the back-and-forth between these social and fiscal conservatives goes beyond the specifics of Romney's proposition. Fiscal and social conservatives have always had their disagreements, even when they have formed alliances of convenience. Even those who consider themselves both fiscally and socially conservative recognize an occasional tension between the two. The eruption of words, however, over a proposal that would result in a net expenditure increase of $66 billion a year (which, by federal spending standards, is small change) reflects something else: a widening chasm on the right that, I suspect, is going to deepen.
  • In part, this is because both social and fiscal conservatives see a crisis enveloping America. They disagree, however, about what the crisis is. Again, the two tendencies can overlap, even within the same person. But real fissures have begun to emerge over what crisis is most important.

Go Back


Leave a Guest Comment

Your Name or Alias
Your Email Address ( your email address will not be published )
Enter Your Comment ( text only please )




Garland Misuses Terms ‘Equity,’ ‘Equality’ John Locke Foundation Guest Editorial, Editorials, Op-Ed & Politics Facebook Bans Myanmar Military


HbAD0

Latest Op-Ed & Politics

says foreign ties of Democrat Socialists of America need to be investigated
massive data collection by license plate readers on highways and streets threaten freedom

HbAD1

“I’m from America, 250 years ago we were way bigger than 6/1 dogs, and look at us thriving now.” Justin Gaethje pulls off an all time sports upset.
There are many people who overlook the brilliance of the US Constitution. They argue that it is outdated and unfit to adequately govern such a modern nation as ours in the 21st century.

HbAD2

"I plan to keep his counsel close until our paths cross again," JD Vance said on Thursday.
On Tuesday, Democratic Gov. Josh Stein signed an executive order creating the bipartisan Health Care Affordability Commission that he said will look at ways to make healthcare more affordable for North Carolinians.
"Margo’s Got Money Troubles" explores how financial desperation drives women to OnlyFans. That’s not empowering. It’s exploitative.

HbAD3

 
 
Back to Top