At the Republican Party’s first-ever midterm convention last week, President Trump promised every adult American a $5,000 “dividend” if Republicans retain Congress in November. The pledge drew immediate backlash from Republicans concerned about inflation, debt, and the prospect of adding roughly $1.2 trillion, before interest, to a federal balance sheet already groaning under its own weight.
It came alongside the administration’s proposal to extend federal child-care subsidies to some married stay-at-home parents. Supporters of the policies argue that the welfare state, and entitlements, are too entrenched to dismantle and that conservatives should settle for modest reforms where possible, and of course use federal power to our advantage.
If I understand the establishment conservatives correctly, we should not reform a 30-year-old entitlement program to stop incentivizing single parenthood because it would be better abolish the entire 91-year-old welfare state, which no one even pretends to think is possible.
— Michael Knowles (@michaeljknowles) September 7, 2026
But why should Trump accept that premise?
Let’s take a step back and remember why Republicans coalesced around Trump in the first place. President Trump is the political wrecking ball of his era. When something stands in the way of a goal he wants to achieve, he finds a path through it: testing boundaries, taking his most consequential policies all the way to the Supreme Court, and, even when they are struck down, searching for another route. He did not build his political career by treating supposedly untouchable institutions as untouchable.
So why can’t that same energy, the same grit and willingness to fight, be directed at entitlements and the welfare state? It probably could be. But Trump has vowed not to touch them. Imagine if he did.
Yes, the president has done plenty: targeting waste, fraud, and abuse while working to ensure taxpayers get more value from every federal dollar. But that is not the heart of the colossal problem Americans face in the years ahead. The problem is not simply who receives the benefits, or whether the programs are administered efficiently. The problem is the entitlement programs themselves, and the ever-larger promises Washington has made without a credible plan to pay for them.
We need either Trump or a man like him to dismantle the welfare state, and honestly, it's something we would all like to see happen.
In the meantime, conservatives should not be asked to celebrate a larger welfare state simply because it is repackaged as a possible tax rebate, a family benefit, or a “dividend.”
Doing so risks abandoning a core conservative principle that extends beyond fiscal responsibility: empowering individuals and families to provide for themselves. That means lower taxes, a growing economy unhindered by unnecessary red tape, and policies that reward work, savings, enterprise, and strong families, not a government increasingly positioned as the first resort whenever Americans need help making ends meet.
