Christie swings back at “Washington politician” Rand Paul: It’s your state that’s vacuuming up federal tax dollars, not mine

posted at 3:41 pm on July 30, 2013 by Allahpundit

Paul needled him last night on Hannity’s show for taking a “gimme, gimme, gimme” attitude towards federal spending on Sandy relief. Here’s Christie needling him back by accusing Paul and his home state of Kentucky of being a couple of deadbeats:

“I find it interesting that Sen. Paul is accusing us of having a ‘gimme, gimme, gimme’ attitude towards federal spending when in fact New Jersey is a donor state and we get 61 cents back on every dollar we send to Washington,” Christie said. “And interestingly, Kentucky gets $1.51 on every dollar they send to Washington. So if Sen. Paul wants to start looking at where he’s going to cut spending to afford defense, maybe he should start cutting the pork barrel spending that he brings home to Kentucky…”

David Frum made a similar point this morning before Christie spoke. If you look at this Economist chart of federal spending and revenue per state from 1990 to 2009, New Jersey was the third biggest net exporter of tax dollars while Kentucky was the 13th biggest net importer. Christie, who accepted a temporary (but not permanent) expansion of Medicaid under ObamaCare, ain’t the guy to be attacking Paul on spending, but that’s the point here: He’s trying to inoculate himself from the damaging big-spender charge in the 2016 primaries by arguing that even libertarians like their tax money. The kicker is his dismissal of Paul as a “Washington politician,” which is … not the way most people think of Rand. But that’s strategic too. The rap on Christie two years from now will be that he’s the champion of the Republican establishment (which is true). This is him trying to muddy those perceptions by arguing that even the famously anti-establishment tea-party senator is really just a big ol’ Beltway parasite at heart.

Anyway, the takeaway is that both of these men must run for president. We want these debates. We need these debates. In fact, one X factor with Christie is whether his willingness to throw punches at grassroots heroes will end up helping him or hurting him with the centrists he’s targeting in the primaries. I agree with Dan McLaughlin that the real winners in this brawl are Rubio, Cruz, and Walker because space is being cleared in the center-right between Christie and Paul for one (or more) of them, but who knows? (Here’s a smart counter-take.) An “angry RINO” charging at rivals on the right would be a novel thing for a GOP primary; normally the RINO is a hapless figure like Romney who tolerates being dumped on by grassroots righties because he knows he needs conservatives in the general election and doesn’t want to alienate them by firing back. Christie might figure that he’ll do well enough with centrist Democrats as nominee that he can afford to lose a few stalwart conservatives. I think he’s wrong about that, if so, but either way, these primaries will be dynamite.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

CC 2016 /

S. D. on July 30, 2013 at 10:39 PM

Anyway, the takeaway is that both of these men must run for president.

Allahpundit Translation: “Traffic Gold.”

The_Jacobite on July 30, 2013 at 10:40 PM

I don’t regret my vote for McCain, nor for Romney. The guys who should be full of regret are the ones who stayed home or who voted for Obama.

unclesmrgol on July 30, 2013 at 10:11 PM

I voted for Palin and Romney. McCain was the only candidate possibly worse than Obama. As bad as Obama is, at least we’re not in the middle of WWIII.

bw222 on July 30, 2013 at 10:46 PM

Anyway, the takeaway is that both of these men must run for president.

Actually AP, IMHO, the takeaway is that neither of these two should run.

Christie, after his on-camera slobberfest with Obama isn;t going to swing any votes from TEA party or Reagan Conservatives anytime soon….he’s McCain without Palin to shore up his VRW credentals.

As for Rand: Especially after the illegal Immigration debate, the less-than ethusatic appeal of “Dynasty” political candidates (See: Clinton, Bush, Kennedy, et al) Rand is going to have an uphill battle with the SAME people that Christie has, the aforementioned Reagan Conservatives.

IF by some chance however, it did get that far, I may be far more comfortable with Rand (his whacked out dad notwithstanding) than with Christie…Christie is good for a Cabinet office, maybe Secretaryship, but as the head guitarist in the band? No way.

BlaxPac on July 30, 2013 at 10:49 PM

I’m not going to calc it, but it looks to be roughly same amount per capita coming back for each.
Dusty on July 30, 2013 at 5:11 PM

Krispy is just using the progressive playbook of exporting/importing net tax dollars when it’s like apples and oranges. Those rates get skewed by types of taxation as in personal vs corporate rates and even by income rate bands.

Better to see stats like what percent paid no taxes due to AGI and again for each bracket. Then look at corporate and capital gains individually. methinks just the bottom rate where people pay no taxes, or better yet get refunds beyond what they paid in would be fun to compare.

AH_C on July 30, 2013 at 11:39 PM

Krispy’s ego is just as big as NJ’s debt

ErnstBlofeld on July 31, 2013 at 12:06 AM

Chrispy, McRino, and Gramnesty. Who is the fourth horseman?

pat on July 31, 2013 at 2:50 AM

Ww3. Is here.

It’s. called the information war and China aims to win.

losarkos on July 31, 2013 at 5:20 AM

Christie lost me and, I believe, the election with that photo op beach tour with Obama after Sandy. Nothing he has to say is of any interest, so get out of presidential politics, it ain’t gonna happen, Chris!

Boats48 on July 31, 2013 at 5:24 AM

After Sandy slobberfest with ‘Barky’, Christie will never have my vote on anything. He is a McCain in the making.

gDavid on July 31, 2013 at 6:06 AM

Rand Paul is right. Christie lost me when he called out Republicans for holding up that Sandy Relief Bill that was so full of pork. Pete King too! And I lost power for two weeks! Neither man is a conservative, I would never vote for either of them for POTUS.

ctmom on July 31, 2013 at 7:23 AM

Christie is making a progressive argument. Inappropriate for a GOPer, no?

I guess I’ll start calling him the Hefty Lefty.

fossten on July 31, 2013 at 7:39 AM

I agree completely. This is a healthy debate for the party to have.

Plus, when is the last time Republicans displayed some moxie and spirit. Ya know, besides the crying, conniving and backroom dealing that are Boehner and McConnell’s hallmarks.

By the way, Christie loses this debate in the long run. It also exposes the GOP-Establishment-Democrat-Lite contingent for what they are.

For years, Christie and NJ have allowed victims to build in those areas they knew were vulnerable. In the process, they sucked up all their tax money and spent it. Then when the inevitable disaster strikes they want the rest of us to pay for this foolishness?

Not on your life will any of that make sense to the majority of people affected by this disaster. Even more sad is that Christie has made victims props in the process and tried to promote a divisive Us-Vs.-Them mentality. Who does THAT remind you of? If you said Christie’s kissing-cousin Obama, you would be correct.

Marcus Traianus on July 31, 2013 at 9:09 AM

Chris Christie was not the one in Washington attaching a wish list to the Sandy bill. Currently that is the way that relief bills are done, they leave open a door for pork from whomever can get their amendment on the bill. It is not what is wrong with Christie, it is what is wrong with the rule of the House and the Senate.

Message to Rand Paul, I hope you don’t get a tornado or hurricane or earthquake in your state.

Fleuries on July 31, 2013 at 9:11 AM

For years, Christie and NJ have allowed victims to build in those areas they knew were vulnerable. In the process, they sucked up all their tax money and spent it. Then when the inevitable disaster strikes they want the rest of us to pay for this foolishness?

Not on your life will any of that make sense to the majority of people affected by this disaster. Even more sad is that Christie has made victims props in the process and tried to promote a divisive Us-Vs.-Them mentality. Who does THAT remind you of? If you said Christie’s kissing-cousin Obama, you would be correct.

Marcus Traianus on July 31, 2013 at 9:09 AM

In fairness to Christie and New Jersey, Christie has only been Governor since 2009, and New Jerseyans have been been building homes in flood-prone areas for decades, under Governors of both parties, and most homes along the Jersey shore have escaped unscathed for decades, giving residents a complacency that turned out to be illusory.

Most states along the Gulf of Mexico, and the East Coast states from North Carolina southward, are regularly hit by hurricanes and storm surges, so that residents know that there are certain beaches that, no matter how attractive they look on a sunny summer day, it is too dangerous to build. Governors of both parties know that hurricanes and storm surges WILL happen, and make plans for evacuation and shelter when they occur.

New Jersey is also frequently hit by coastal storms, including in the winter, but the vast majority of them are centered out to sea, and the winds around them are out of the northeast to north, so there is little storm surge, since wind out of the northeast passes over Long Island or Cape Cod, and there is not enough open water (“fetch”) where the wind can develop a significant storm surge.

Sandy was a highly unusual storm, whose center moved westward from the Atlantic toward southern New Jersey, so that the strongest winds were from the east-southeast. In that direction, there are no land-masses to break up the storm surge, which was higher than for any storm in the previous century. Even the 1938 hurricane, whose storm surge was so devastating to eastern Long Island, Rhode Island, and southeastern Massachusetts, did not produce a storm surge in New Jersey. Since Jersey shore residents had not seen such a storm in over a century, they thought it would never happen. Should Gov. Christie be blamed for the lack of preparedness, when many of the destroyed homes were built before he was born?

On the other hand, there are fewer excuses for homes built in low-lying areas of the Raritan and Passaic River valleys. Although storm surges from the east are rare, these areas are regularly flooded by runoff from heavy rains over the hills to the north and west, yet people keep building homes in what is naturally swampland, and getting FEMA to rebuild them when they are flooded.

Maybe the FEMA laws need to be changed so that FEMA only pays the replacement cost for a home in a given location ONCE, and the owner should take the money and move to higher ground. If the same home gets flooded out twice in the same location–well too bad, maybe people shouldn’t live there!

Steve Z on July 31, 2013 at 11:34 AM

I despise Christie for helping Romney lose last year. I would sit home before I’d vote for him.

I have a disabled child who will be harmed by obummercare. I’m not interested in any candidate who doesn’t want to truly repeal it.

sherrimae on July 31, 2013 at 10:02 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3