Vice President JD Vance recently warned voters not to “throw the baby out with the bathwater.” That describes an important question facing Republicans who disagree with President Trump over war, debt or another individual policy: Should one disagreement cause them to reject his entire program?
Tucker Carlson has become a prominent example. He strongly opposes foreign military intervention and frequently warns about federal debt. Those concerns led him to criticize Trump-backed Michigan Senate candidate Mike Rogers while describing Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed’s campaign as “literally Trumpian.” Carlson also said he would not vote for Rogers “at gunpoint.”
Carlson’s objections to war and government surveillance deserve consideration. But voters should examine the complete record — border enforcement, spending, energy, manufacturing, healthcare and national security — rather than allowing two subjects to determine every conclusion.
The debt problem is real. The Government Accountability Office reported that publicly held federal debt reached $31.3 trillion in April 2026. Federal interest spending exceeded national-defense spending during fiscal year 2025.
Here is the problem in plain English: Washington is again spending far more than it collects. Every year’s shortfall must be borrowed and added to the national debt. America must first eliminate that yearly deficit and produce a surplus before it can begin paying down the debt itself.
My previously discussed figure of approximately $1.3 trillion in annual debt reduction was a hypothetical target — not an official government forecast. It assumed that border enforcement, domestic energy, deregulation, tariffs, reshoreing and substantial spending reductions would work together.
Congress cannot be treated as a spectator. Presidents propose policies and administer existing laws, but Congress approves taxes, spending and permanent reforms. Senators who prevent legislation from receiving a vote share responsibility when its intended results cannot be achieved. Those who approve legislation must also accept responsibility for its actual costs.
Immigration enforcement provides an example. The administration established a goal of one million deportations annually, supported by at least 3,000 ICE arrests per day. Arrests and completed deportations are different measurements, and current deportations average approximately 1,200 per day. Court proceedings, detention space, transportation and foreign-government cooperation affect that number. If Congress expects stronger enforcement, it must provide lawful authority and resources — and then demand measurable results.
Federal Medicaid financing supplies another example. Federal officials concluded that certain state financing arrangements generated additional federal money and freed state funds for programs such as California’s healthcare coverage for undocumented residents. The federal government has acted to close that financing loophole.
Neither automatic support nor automatic rejection is responsible government. Congress should vote openly, publish credible cost estimates and measure results. Tucker Carlson’s opposition to war and debt should not erase every other issue. Likewise, supporting Trump should not prevent Congress from scrutinizing the costs of his proposals. Americans deserve to know what succeeded, what failed and who was responsible — without throwing out an entire program over one disagreement.
Finally, give representatives and senators six-year terms, limit them to two terms, and stagger their elections so one-third face the voters every two years.
— Rick Farinelli,
Madera