tippinsights Editorial Board, July 3, 2025
Dems’ Motto: Bring Down a Tireless President at Any Cost
When the United States Senate passed President Trump’s marathon budget bill and sent it back to the House for final approval, the vote was 51 to 50 — the slimmest margin possible. The Senate had split evenly, and Vice President J.D. Vance, acting as President of the Senate as provided by the Constitution, cast the tie-breaking vote.
Although Republicans currently hold a 53-50 majority in the Senate, three GOP senators broke ranks to vote with the Democrats. They did so out of conviction, citing the interests of their respective states or their ideologies over party loyalty. But on the Democratic side, not a single senator crossed party lines to offset those defections.
As we watched speeches on the Senate floor and reviewed Democratic commentary to the press, their message was predictable and uniform. They claimed the bill offered tax cuts for the rich, spending cuts for the poor, and unfair treatment for rural communities. Forty-seven Democratic senators — including those representing states that voted for President Trump in last year’s election, such as Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, and Wisconsin — still voted against the bill. Their behavior was a stunning rebuke to the very voters in battleground states who had supported Trump’s second-term agenda.
In the House of Representatives, the situation was nearly identical. The bill initially passed 215 to 214, despite opposition from several Republican members, including Rep. Thomas Massie, who objected on libertarian grounds. Once in the Senate, however, the bill was revised. These changes included a more lenient approach to Medicaid reforms and the lowering of a remittance tax provision — despite earlier assurances to the House that such amendments would not be made.
According to constitutional procedure, both chambers must pass identical versions of a bill before it reaches the president’s desk. Since the Senate altered the House bill, it must now return to the House for another vote. Any further amendments would trigger yet another Senate vote. Given such narrow margins in both chambers, it is nothing short of miraculous that this bill is still advancing.
To the outside world, this ongoing political theater may resemble the backroom horse-trading seen in many parliamentary democracies. Just minutes before Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska agreed to vote in favor of the bill, Senate leaders quietly inserted language granting her state-specific exemptions from several budget provisions. This was deal-making at its most brazen, but it was necessary — without her vote, the legislation would have failed.
Meanwhile, the drama extended beyond Capitol Hill. Elon Musk, once a close ally and confidant of President Trump, launched a blistering campaign against the bill on X. He criticized the budget’s provision to lift the debt ceiling by $5 trillion, warning of a fiscal catastrophe. Though Musk’s concerns are legitimate, his fury was aimed at the wrong target. The debt ceiling increase is not a blank check; it is a procedural necessity. Without it, the government cannot meet its obligations, and Congress would be forced into repeated standoffs that destabilize the economy and diminish American credibility abroad.
As staunch fiscal conservatives, we share Musk’s broader concern. We have previously praised former West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin for killing the $6 trillion monstrosity known as the Build Back Better Act. Manchin acted alone and saved the nation from a deluge of irresponsible spending.
There is no easy solution to America’s debt crisis. Any serious effort to stabilize the budget requires a fundamental restructuring of the American economy. Democrats prioritize government spending, and Republicans are committed to maintaining or expanding tax relief. Both approaches will inevitably put pressure on the federal budget. It is telling that only two presidents in modern history have submitted balanced budgets: Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. Even Bush’s claim is suspect, as he inherited Clinton’s economic momentum and saw his own fiscal trajectory derailed by the September 11 attacks.
Clinton’s ability to produce three consecutive budget surpluses was not accidental. First, he was a shrewd political operator who adjusted course after Democrats were routed in the 1994 midterms. In a dramatic admission, Clinton went to Capitol Hill and declared that “the era of big government is over.” That willingness to concede and adapt is nonexistent in today’s Washington.
Second, Clinton presided over a period of explosive economic growth and relative global peace. His administration oversaw the deregulation of telecommunications and the rise of the internet, which spurred the dot-com boom. The economy became so overheated that Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan famously warned of “irrational exuberance.” He was right. The bubble eventually burst, and just as the smoke cleared, terrorists attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
With bipartisan cooperation now extinct, the only path left for President Trump to reduce America’s staggering debt is to engineer a Clinton-style economic renaissance. This would mean more jobs, higher wages, and a broader tax base. As more Americans transition to higher-paying employment, tax revenues are projected to rise. As labor force participation rebounds from the lows seen during the Obama and Biden administrations, government dependency is expected to decline.
President Trump has already begun cutting billions in wasteful spending, starting with the salaries of federal employees and contractors. He has faced relentless obstruction from activist judges who have blocked these reforms in court. Nevertheless, he persists. Additionally, tariff revenue has increased as companies pass costs to consumers. While this creates temporary price pressure, it will disappear if manufacturers re-shore production. General Electric recently announced that it would resume manufacturing appliances, such as washing machines and dryers, in the United States.
When not a single Democrat was willing to question reckless policies while they were in power, such as the Biden administration’s failure to secure the southern border, the country suffered as a result. Had even a handful of Democrats taken a stand against Biden’s immigration collapse, the crisis could have been contained years ago. Instead, we are now forced to spend massive resources on enforcement and correction, actions that the Democrats vehemently oppose.
Americans are taught in middle school civics that democracy is the government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Today’s Democratic Party has replaced the word “people” with “party.” Many of the crises America is facing today stem from the Democratic Party’s rigid, lockstep voting behavior. Americans want them to put the country first.
