Updated: Aug 20, 2019
No time to read? Listen on the podcast instead!
Yesterday Rand Paul and Mike Lee forced a bill delay on the 9/11 First Responders bill. This bill allowed an unlimited amount of funding for 9/11 first responders and their families for the next 72 years.
The media, left wing, and right wing, have portrayed this as a blocking of the bill. They have portrayed this as stopping money from going out to the responders themselves., even though $12 billion has gone out to the responders and the victims families, as well as $2 billion remaining in the budget to continue going out right now.
That isn't true at all. What Rand Paul did, as he did with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, was force a vote on and amendment adding something called a "Pay For" into the bill.
What most people don't know is that originally, there was something called a "Pay-Go" provision in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. That meant that the next step following the tax cuts was to cut spending in the budget to meet a potential reduction in income.
Speaking of a reduction in income, the tax revenue as a percentage of the Federal tax receipts has increased since the passage of the tax cut. That's right, they cut taxes and are taking in more money.
Rand Paul himself said in an interview with Neil Cavuto, that the 9/11 bill will still come to a vote next week, and it will pass. All he asked was to add an amendment to the bill saying that the money needed to come from another part of the Governments +$4,200,000,000,000 budget.
He named such ideas as ceasing funding for a study that is studying the sex habits of Japanese Quail while high on cocaine. He suggested we cease funding for a study that looks at whether or not you are likely to eat something off of a buffet when you've seen the person in front of you sneeze on the food.
I would suggest we look at taking the billions in foreign aid we give to countries like Pakistan, Syria, Jordan, etc., and reallocate that to the 9/11 First Responders Fund.
Is the media uproar over Paul and Lee's principled stand just a convenient continuation of rhetoric stating that Republican's are evil?