The ‘hawks’ of the U.S. House have come to the rescue — ours | Guest Opinion

A valuable hawk has been nearing extinction in recent years, and nobody has seemed to care. Such indifference was a surprising turnabout after more than a century in which our feathered friends had many determined defenders.

Way back in the 1890s, for instance, a group of Boston women, alarmed that the very survival of the passenger pigeon was endangered by a fad of festooning ladies’ hats with feathers, founded the Massachusetts Audubon Society.

The National Audubon Society, soon thereafter, was incorporated in 1905. Alas, its conservation efforts were too late to save the poor passenger pigeon. In 1915, the last known survivor died in a zoo.

The permanent loss of such a famous bird helped etch the issue of bird extinctions into the public consciousness, and concern peaked following the 1962 publication of Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring.”

That book, widely credited with kick-starting the environmental movement, led to restrictions on DDT and other pesticides. A steep decline in the population of the bald eagle, our national symbol, had been blamed on DDT.

There’s remains, though, a different kind of endangered “bird” — the deficit hawks, those budget-conscious politicians who worry about wasteful spending and, especially at the federal level, our growing national debt. And it might be making a comeback.

Historically the red and blue variants have been spotted in the same political habitats. Wisconsin provides examples. Deep-blue liberal Sen. William Proxmire mocked wasteful expenditures by giving them his “Golden Fleece Award.” Crimson conservative Rep. Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney’s VP running mate in 2012, made taming the deficit a key campaign issue.

Sadly, 25 years of budget deficits and a growing national debt have passed since 1997, when President Bill Clinton signed into law the most recent balanced federal budget.

Since then, presidential candidates of both parties have made promises about taming federal spending, but it hasn’t happened. The excuses have ranged from wars — Iraq and Afghanistan, among others — to the pandemic, with the use of tax cuts and spending hikes to respond to recessions along the way.

Now, however, there may be some hope for the deficit hawk’s resurgence. This week, the U.S. House of Representatives adopted a set of rules that should bring much more transparency and accountability to federal spending.

Unfortunately, the liberal-leaning mainstream media, which had delighted in reporting on the House GOP’s intra-party fight over Kevin McCarthy’s speakership, portrayed the new rules as a surrender to “right-wing extremists.”

Granted, some members of the so-called Freedom Caucus could credibly be described as right wing on certain issues, although the media’s definitions of right wing/left wing are reminiscent of the inebriated highway contractor who declared that “the middle of the road is wherever I paint the stripe.”

On budget issues, however, the new rules bring about much-needed procedural reforms. Gone are the omnibus bills that bundled spending into a take-it-or-leave-it legislation.

Moreover, as The New York Times reported, “The package imposes rules to try to limit spending, including blocking consideration of legislation that would increase mandatory spending. . . . Republicans are also requiring a supermajority vote of the House to raise taxes.”

As is the practice in the Florida Legislature, U.S. House members will now have 72 hours to peruse spending bills before a final vote. Open debate on amendments will be allowed.

Moreover, spending in the 2024 budget will be capped at 2022 levels, a goal that ought to be achievable given the reduced need for pandemic-related spending and the revenue increases attributable to inflation.

Unfortunately, in a signal that House Democrats have no intention of working with their colleagues across the aisle, not a single member of the minority party voted in favor of these excellent new rules.

Democrats are ignoring the long-term consequences that a continuation of out-of-control federal spending may well have. Left unchecked, it could trigger runaway inflation, further raising interest rates and potentially undermining the value of the dollar as the preferred currency of international trade.

Moreover, with rising interest rates on a national debt already in the trillions of dollars, the federal government’s own borrowing will become more expensive and consume a larger and larger share of each subsequent federal budget.

No doubt the spend-happy Biden administration wishes it could treat federal borrowing like student-loan forgiveness. Alas, for Uncle Sam, defaulting on debts could cause an economic catastrophe in the United States, with far-reaching consequences abroad.

So here’s a toast to a bottom line about Uncle Sam’s bottom line: Instead of ignoring or misrepresenting the tenuous revival of the valuable deficit hawk, it should be celebrated.

Robert F. Sanchez, of Tallahassee, is a former member of the Miami Herald Editorial Board. He writes for the Herald’s conservative opinion newsletter, Right to the Point. It’s weekly, and it’s free. To subscribe, go to miamiherald.com/righttothepoint.