X/@RandPaul
With an attempt to challenge the common wisdom that all Republicans would support their party on the Middle East issue and tax bill, Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky railed against President Trump’s handling of the Middle East tension and the controversial tax bill. The senator, known for his libertarian-leaning views on foreign policy, gave a rather blunt assessment on the administration’s line of action and gave an update on his policy stance toward the huge tax bill.
Advertisement
The interview began with a discussion on increasing tensions between Israel and Iran, with Paul pondering about the effectiveness of U.S. interference in the region. “The track record of U.S. foreign interventions in the Middle East is not a good one,” Paul said, naming lengthy conflicts in Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan. While recognizing Trump’s effort for a ceasefire, he wondered whether this time would bring a different outcome given past failures of such interventions: “if you look at the history of the last 20 years, that has not been the history of our intervention.”
These comments come as reports emerged that Israeli forces had increased their military presence inside Iran despite attempts by Trump to start some talks. The senator voiced concern over mission creep should more soldiers be killed in these operations: “what happens if a significant number of our soldiers are killed? The new conservatives, the war mongers in DC will immediately call for soldiers on the ground.” Such statements highlight the ongoing schism among Republicans on foreign policy, especially military intervention.
Shifting to domestic matters, Paul then gave “an update on where I stand on ‘the Big, not-yet Beautiful Bill’”-a nickname for the current tax legislation that Congress is considering. Paul supported the tax-cut elements of the bill, but was opposed mainly to its spending provisions and to raising the debt ceiling. “We’re accumulating about $2 trillion in debt every year,” Paul stated, likening Congress to “an irresponsible teenager that’s shown that they’re not good with money.”
Paul encouraged a different approach to negating all these debt ceiling increases, suggesting that any increase in debt ceiling should be temporary and only last for three months instead of multi-year extensions. “Congress is like an irresponsible teenager…we should be giving them small increments of debt ceiling and then checking to see if they’re behaving well with their money,” said Paul. Following this rhetoric, Paul essentially found himself at odds with both Republican leadership and the administration under Trump, who want a more long-term solution to the debt ceiling.
Paul went on to declare that he and a few other Republican senators, including Ron Johnson, Rick Scott, and Mike Lee, are working to change the bill, especially the spending parts. “If the conservatives will hold strong, the bill could be materially changed for the better,” said Paul. However, he also admitted that the administration was looking for a very smooth and fast passage of the bill by July 4th.
The interview concluded with Paul rejecting the description of his foreign policy views as isolationist. “There are no isolationists that would never go outside of our borders when we were attacked on 9-11,” Paul elaborated on the distinction between non-interventionism and isolationism. He also embraced that, more than likely, diplomatic efforts will be the preferred choice over military action in dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
From the time of the CNBC appearance of Paul, there was immediate activity online, and those in favor or even opponents joined in on the discussion of Paul’s stances. One user asked, “How much $$$ you getting for always resisting your own party?” Another user responded, “No one cares where you stand Rand! Americans trust Trump.” These equally extreme comments only further exemplify how conflicted and contentious the Middle East situation and tax bill debates are among conservatives.
The commentary by Paul springs at a most defining moment for foreign and domestic policy. With threats still high in the Middle East and the tax bill with an uncertain fate in the Senate, the views of the Kentucky Senator could become an influential force in steering the developments on these two fronts. His outright rejection of party-but in fact reinforces one of the most independent voices in the Senate.
Advertisement
The further debating is about to unfold and, instead, all eyes are glued on whether Paul and his conservative allies can really pull off taxing bill reforms and, in the meantime, whether the administration’s Middle East strategy can present a more glan-fi past interventions. For now, both remain an issue on which he remains skeptical, forming a unique blend of fiscal conservatism and foreign policy restraint that his career has been built on.