[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 196 (Thursday, November 20, 2025)]
[House]
[Pages H4822-H4823]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1015
                    GOVERNMENT IS STILL THE PROBLEM

  (Mr. McClintock of California was recognized to address the House for 
5 minutes.)
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, Zohran Mamdani's winning message was 
affordability, that the necessities of life are increasingly out of 
reach for most people, and that government is the answer.
  He said on election night: ``There is no problem too large for 
government to solve.''
  Mr. Speaker, he is right about the problem, but he is completely 
wrong about the solution. As Ronald Reagan often warned: ``Government 
is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.''

[[Page H4823]]

  Housing affordability is a good place to start. When and where a free 
market is maintained, homebuilders have every incentive to meet the 
housing needs at every income level. The profit margin might be bigger 
at the top, but the sheer numbers of lower income families compensate 
with volume, assuring ample affordable housing for all income levels.
  Government sets basic safety standards but otherwise leaves consumers 
alone to make their own decisions about everything else. As the tax 
base grows, new revenues are available to expand water systems, 
electricity generation, highway capacity, schools, police, and fire, 
all the necessities of a community.
  Landlords have every incentive to provide as many rental units as the 
population needs, while competition keeps rents low and demand keeps 
units plentiful.
  What has happened? Government decided to solve what socialists viewed 
as problems.
  To solve suburban sprawl, the socialists began imposing severe limits 
and costly fees on construction permits. Builders could no longer 
profit from building vast numbers of affordable homes, so they focused 
their limited permits on the pricier models.
  To solve climate change, the socialists mandated outrageously 
expensive add-ons like solar panels and hermetically sealed windows.
  To solve their environmental angst, they required pointless studies 
that were endlessly time-consuming and outrageously costly along with 
backbreaking, outrageous environmental fees, adding many tens of 
thousands of dollars to the costs that were all passed on to helpless 
homebuyers.
  As these solutions drove up the price of housing, the socialists 
began offering subsidies to lower income earners who had been priced 
out of the market by the socialists' own policies. As taxpayer dollars 
flooded into the already constricted market, prices and rents rose 
still further. As socialists solved the rental problem by freezing 
rents, landlords stopped building new units or maintaining existing 
ones.
  When anything is scarce, it is expensive. When it is plentiful, it is 
cheap. Socialists have made housing scarce and, therefore, expensive. 
Nowhere can this be seen more clearly than comparing the socialist 
utopia of California with the free State of Texas.
  Last year, more housing permits were granted in the Houston and 
Dallas metropolitan areas than in all of Gavin Newsom's California. The 
median price of a home in Texas is $345,000. In California, it is 
$900,000.
  Take healthcare. Americans once paid for their own healthcare. They 
could choose among policies offered by hundreds of competing providers 
for the one that best met their needs and circumstances. Most opted for 
inexpensive catastrophic plans for accidents and illnesses that could 
have bankrupted them, while paying for routine care out of pocket. 
Competition for their business kept prices low and quality high.
  Socialists objected to leaving the poor to an extensive network of 
charities. They solved our healthcare inequalities with highly 
subsidized and mandated coverage that leaves consumers powerless to 
choose their own best options while severing the connection between the 
patient and the payer.
  When somebody else is paying the bill, the patient doesn't care about 
price, and the payer doesn't care about quality. The result is costs 
spiraling out of control while patient satisfaction continues to 
decline.
  At the center of socialism is the mistaken belief that profit is 
waste, and if it can be removed from the equation, everything will be 
cheaper. That is the fundamental misconception behind Mamdani's 
government grocery stores. Yet, profit is not waste. Profit is the 
essential ingredient that spurs competition, drives innovation, demands 
efficiency, and craves consumer satisfaction. Take profit out of the 
picture, and you have just learned the difference between FedEx and the 
post office.
  Consumer electronics have steadily declined in cost while quality has 
steadily improved, precisely because the socialists have not yet 
decided to solve this market. When they do, you can expect the same 
high prices and decline in quality that they have already delivered in 
every field that they have solved, from housing to healthcare.
  It comes down to four simple words: Freedom works. Socialism sucks.

                          ____________________