Since the election, the mainstream media has been hammering the same theme when it comes to the House Freedom Caucus, a 40-member group of conservative lawmakers. The New York Times, the Associated Press and the Washington Post have all used the terms "hard-right" or "hard-liners" when describing this caucus in a flagrant attempt to cast it as an extremist entity in the Republican-controlled House.
There was a time when these terms were used exclusively for fascists and Nazis, but no longer. Now, they’re used to describe any Republican who believes the Constitution means what it says and believe the purpose of the party is to expand liberty. As for the subject of these news stories, they’re often about whether the House Freedom Caucus will support a challenge to Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, particularly after Donald Trump’s victory.
Let’s set the record straight, not that the mainstream media cares: The House Freedom Caucus is a group of members who believe in the right to private property and the free market. They believe in a vision of limited government defined by the Constitution and the liberties guaranteed by it. Their main motivation is not bankrupting future generations. They have a moral obligation to vote for a vision of government consistent with fiscal responsibility and limited government.
That’s why my organization is committed to support and defend these members. They will have the support of grassroots activists when they take hard votes.
Moreover, polling indicates that the Freedom Caucus is very much in step with mainstream America. While the media casts government-shutdowns as the work of extremists, a recent survey conducted on behalf of my organization, FreedomWorks, found that 48 percent of registered voters would rather see the government shutdown until all sides agree on a budget that doesn’t increase the national debt, which currently exceeds $19.8 trillion.