Starving the Beast

The Republican Strategy to Create Fiscal Crisis

Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash

Two plus two equals four. There are twenty-four hours in a day. And the Republican tax plan currently moving through Congress is not just irresponsible—it is deliberately engineered to create a fiscal crisis that will be used to dismantle America's social safety net.

Let's speak plainly about what we're witnessing. This is not a good-faith disagreement about tax policy or the proper size of government. It is a calculated strategy to manufacture the conditions under which programs like Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and food assistance can be eliminated without facing the political consequences of directly attacking them.

They call it “starving the beast”—an approach that has animated Republican fiscal policy for decades. The strategy is simple: pass massive tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the wealthy, creating unsustainable deficits. Then, when the inevitable fiscal crisis arrives, declare with rehearsed solemnity that America "simply can't afford" its social safety net anymore.

The evidence is not hidden. It's right there in plain sight.

This morning, as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” narrowly passed the House, the 30-year Treasury bond yield pushed past 5%. Moody's downgraded U.S. sovereign debt, projecting our national debt will surge to 134% of GDP within a decade. The markets are sending clear warning signals about the fiscal irresponsibility of cutting taxes by trillions while making only token gestures at spending cuts.

Republicans know exactly what they're doing. They know this will likely cause a sovereign debt crisis. They think when it comes, they'll simply be able to convince the American people to make do without any welfare programs, which they will argue are unaffordable?

This isn't speculation. It's the explicit strategy. Create the crisis, then exploit it.

Consider the absurdity of the current moment. In March, Trump promised a balanced budget “in the near future.” Now, his signature legislation will dramatically deepen the deficit. Last month, when bond markets reacted negatively to his tariff policies, he immediately backed down, admitting that “the bond market is very tricky.” Yet now, with bond markets sending even stronger signals of distress about his tax plan, he pushes forward.

Why? Because the fiscal crisis is not a bug of the policy—it's the feature.

The truth that goes unspoken in Washington is that many Republican leaders do not want Medicare to exist. They do not want Social Security to exist. They do not want food assistance or housing grants or Medicaid to exist. But they know that directly attacking these programs is political suicide. Americans across the political spectrum depend on and support these programs.

So instead, they create conditions where these programs can be presented as unaffordable luxuries rather than essential services. It's a form of policy laundering—implementing deeply unpopular changes through artificial crisis rather than transparent democratic process.

What makes this strategy particularly malevolent is how it inverts moral responsibility. When the crisis hits, those who engineered it will present themselves as the responsible adults making tough choices, while portraying anyone who fights to preserve these programs as fiscally irresponsible.

This is gaslighting on a national scale—deliberately creating a problem and then blaming others for failing to solve it on your terms.

There's a profound cynicism at the heart of this approach. It assumes that in a moment of crisis, Americans can be convinced to abandon their most vulnerable—that fear and confusion will override our basic commitment to care for one another. It assumes that we can be manipulated into accepting the dismantling of programs that represent the best of who we are as a nation.

We must name this strategy for what it is: not fiscal conservatism, but fiscal sabotage. Not governance, but destruction. Not necessity, but choice.

Because make no mistake—it is a choice. A nation as wealthy as the United States can afford to care for its elderly, sick, and poor. What we cannot afford is to continue slashing taxes for the wealthiest while pretending it won't have consequences.

When the crisis comes—and it will come if this tax plan becomes law—we must remember that it was engineered. We must reject the false narrative that our social safety net is somehow the problem rather than the target.

We must remember that two plus two equals four, that there are twenty-four hours in a day, and that deliberately engineering fiscal collapse to force policy changes that could never survive democratic scrutiny is not governance—it's sabotage.

The wire still holds, but only if we refuse to accept engineered crises as neutral facts rather than deliberate political weapons. Only if we maintain the moral clarity to see this strategy for what it is.

And what it is, quite simply, is evil.