Where Have the 'Don't Tread on Me' Republicans Gone?
Many conservatives are embracing big government, from police-state immigration tactics to socialist economic policies.
Based on the troubling goings-on in Minneapolis, it's hard to describe former GOP Rep. Justin Amash's post on X as hyperbolic: "They're building a police state right before our eyes—which will ultimately be deployed against conservative Christians and gun owners and those who refuse the jab—and a lot of 'Republicans' with Gadsden flags in their bios are like, 'Yeah, FAFO!'"
There's no hope for anyone cheering, but "responsible" conservatives have a rationale for defending these actions: It's better than having Democrats in charge. Had, say, Kamala Harris won the presidency, she would have imposed socialistic policies, they say. That's probably true, but have you noticed the latest policy plans from Donald Trump? His economic proposals echo the Democratic platform.
As part of an affordability agenda designed to mitigate ongoing inflation caused in part by his own tariff policies, Trump has announced a few initiatives.
First, he plans to cap interest rates on credit cards at 10%. The president recently called U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, a progressive Democratic rabble-rouser, to hash out this idea.
Second, he said he's "immediately taking steps to ban large institutional investors from buying more single-family homes…People live in homes, not corporations." This is similar to an idea pushed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, although the Trump plan—a total ban—goes even further than what California's progressive Democrats have been proposing.
Third, he's embraced various policies that let the federal government interfere with the governance of private companies. He has proposed a cap on compensation for CEOs of defense contractors. He has called for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which are government-sponsored enterprises, to buy $200 billion in mortgage bonds from the private market to potentially lower mortgage rates. He has muscled private companies such as Intel to sell portions of their companies to the government. This gives the president and the feds power to dictate corporate policy—a longstanding goal of democratic socialists.
Fourth, the president is expanding handouts to individual Americans. He's proposed $2,000 tariff-dividend checks, which is reminiscent of Joe Biden's COVID-related stimulus checks. He announced a $12 billion bailout of farmers to mitigate his tariff policies. Tariffs are particularly pernicious tax hikes and are now the cornerstone of Republican economic policy. Tariffs, by the way, have traditionally been championed by labor-union Democrats.
These are the types of easy-button leftist solutions that always make matters worse because they interfere with the workings of the free market. Markets direct goods and services and set prices that reflect supply and demand. When the government meddles, via regulation, taxation, government ownership, and "industrial policy," companies make decisions based on political preferences. It slows economic growth, stifles innovation, and rewards firms that serve the king rather than the consumer.
Specifically, capping credit-card rates will mean that companies can no longer base interest charges on the risks they face from borrowers. They are a price control and such controls (think rent control or gas price caps) will, as the Cato Institute notes, lead to shortages and suffering. With 10% caps, credit-card companies will only issue cards to people with stellar credit. Most of those people simply use the cards for convenience and to gather points for, say, free airline trips. Lower-credit consumers will lose that option, which helps them make ends meet. Relying on credit cards is never ideal, but it's better than the alternative—payday loans and loan sharks.
Corporate landlords own fewer than 3 percent of housing units nationwide and provide a valuable service—offering single-family houses for rent. Banning corporate purchases won't reduce housing prices, but will disrupt local property markets. Housing is unaffordable in many parts of the country, especially California, but the answer is getting the government out of the way by reducing fees and regulations and making it easier to build.
Likewise, giving the feds a bigger role in issuing mortgages will backfire. One of the reasons it's so difficult for many people to get mortgages is that the federal government—rather than competitive pressure—dictates mortgage terms. And do we really want the government directing private corporate decisions? That will benefit crony capitalists, not consumers. The government should make it easier for companies to pursue competitive, entrepreneurial ideas rather than the stale ones promoted by central government planners. Finally, it should go without saying to any conservative that stimulus checks drive up federal debt and inflation.
A decades-old Catholic social teaching is known as the "seamless garment of life," which references the tunic Jesus wore at the crucifixion. The faithful are supposed to revere life in a seamless manner by opposing all policies that undermine the dignity of human beings. These days, Republicans are pursuing a seamless garment of big government, from police-state immigration tactics to their interventionist economic policies. With both parties now hostile to limited government, Americans can only expect civic life to get worse rather than better.
This column was first published in The Orange County Register.
