By REP. KEVIN MCCABE
Last Friday, Rep. Ky Holland stood up on the House floor to sound the alarm about the so-called “civic economy.” He warned that cutting federal jobs — like President Trump has promised — will cripple communities, tank the free market, and send us all into economic free fall.
Let’s look at that a bit. Alaskans don’t fall for scare tactics without evidence, and history tells us that a leaner government doesn’t kill the economy; in fact, it strengthens it.
First, let’s start with a definition. What is a “civic economy”? It’s not some new DC buzzword, it is not an economic term, and it is not one that economists or scholars use.
Generally speaking, it’s just people getting things done together — whether it’s a Kenai Peninsula co-op selling local beef or Big Lake neighbors pitching in to build a boat ramp. It’s regular folks, not bureaucrats, improving their communities without government handholding.
The free market? That’s the bigger animal in the discussion. It is not, as Holland suggested, subservient to a civic economy. The free market is supply, demand, competition, and the freedom to turn hard work into success. The civic economy is actually an ancillary part of that, not the thing keeping it alive.
The big fear of many people right now is that cutting federal jobs — maybe as many as 200,000 if Trump sticks to his past plans – will gut local projects and send the free market into a tailspin. The Democrats, liberals, and big-government independents claim federal workers and grants are the glue holding communities together.
Sorry, folks, history proves that’s nonsense. Let’s look at the cuts of a famous Democrat president in the 1990s.
Under President Bill Clinton, the government slashed over 377,000 federal civilian jobs — some estimates put it as high as 426,000. That’s 17-20% of the federal workforce. Most of those cuts came through buyouts, early retirements, or voluntary exits. In fact, only about 20,000 federal employees were forced out.
Did the economy crash? Hardly. The private sector actually boomed, adding 22.7 million jobs. Unemployment hit a 30-year low, GDP grew 35%, and we had four straight years of budget surpluses—the only ones since 1969. The national debt? It shrank from 47.8% of GDP in 1993 to 31.4% by 2001. Instead of collapsing, the free market thrived. America thrived!
Fast forward to today. The federal workforce is still sitting at 2.1 million civilians—a tiny fraction of the 155 million workers in America. A 10% cut (about 200,000 jobs) barely moves the needle in a $27 trillion economy. To put it in perspective, 20 million jobs were lost in a single month in 2020, and the economy still bounced back. I know it hurts some of our friends and family, and I understand the angst in a government town like Juneau or even a government state like Alaska, but if a real crisis like that didn’t destroy the free market, some federal job cuts won’t either.
And the civic economy isn’t dependent on federal paychecks. In 2023, US nonprofits pulled in $2.6 trillion, and only a third of that came from government funding—mostly at the state and local level, not DC. The rest came from private donations, local businesses, and good old-fashioned hard work. Co-ops and community projects don’t need a bureaucrat in Virginia to survive; they run on members, markets, and local initiative.
Clinton’s job cuts came alongside tax hikes on the wealthy and spending reductions in defense and welfare. The result? The economy grew, revenues climbed, and businesses thrived. The civic economy didn’t collapse—people adapted, just like they always do and America boomed.
I have heard some argue, “But what about federal grants? Won’t cutting them kill local projects?” Not likely. After 2008, when the feds tightened spending, private crowdfunding exploded. By 2012, crowdfunding had hit $1.6 billion—funding everything from community centers to small businesses. Less government doesn’t mean people give up; it means they step up. That’s freedom, not failure.
And let’s not forget that a smaller federal government actually strengthens the civic economy. Fewer regulations mean it’s easier to start a co-op, pool local funds, and launch new businesses. Less interference from Washington means communities lean on each other, not bureaucrats. That’s the Alaskan way. Less government equals more liberty. Why do progressives have such a hard time with that concept?
Rep. Holland and others can wring their hands and worry all they want; publishing lists of jobs lost, and offices affected, but the facts are clear – the civic economy isn’t held together by federal jobs, and the free market isn’t fragile. Trump’s reductions in force might shuffle some desks in Washington, or even in Alaska, but they won’t sink Main Street or Wall Street. If anything, they’ll open up more opportunity for innovation, local control, and private-sector growth. Clinton’s cuts trimmed government waste, fueled economic expansion, and even reduced the national debt. There’s no reason to believe history won’t repeat itself.
Change can make people nervous — I get that. But this country wasn’t built on government paychecks. It was built on self-reliance, hard work, and the drive to make things happen without Washington’s permission. That’s the Alaskan way, and it’s the American way too.
Rep. Kevin McCabe serves in the Alaska Legislature for Big Lake, District 30.
I was actually surprised by this article coming from McCabe. Some very good historical points. Where was the sympathy for lost jobs during the phony pandenic?
I don’t get it. Why are you surprised?
Because McCabe is a RINO NeoCon UniParty member.
Supports Canada Free Trade tariffs over Trump Fair Trade.
That’s why.
How someone who accepted a government paycheck for years, and I suspect had his education, including a masters degree, paid for by the federal government, can write “this country wasn’t built on government paychecks” is beyond me.
You must not have ever been in the military. A military member doesn’t “accept” anything. He or she generally works darn hard for it. Time away from family, dangerous missions, long days. I was in the CG for 20 years. First year pay was 365/mo, working 80-100 hour weeks. Back then a military family qualified for food stamps until about E4. Many of us worked various second (part time) jobs, in the private sector. Some of the junior guys working for me in the CG used to go to the restarurants and take spare packets of ketsup to make tomato soup towards the end of a pay period. Many of my contemporary’s volunteered to get out at 10-15 years due to the two RIFs in play. Some were forced out. Point is people don’t join the military for the pay, or to stay at home and work from their dining room table. It is hard hard work for long days.
The GI bill was part of my history, and various education packages have been part of the attraction for the military before or since then – are military folks just supposed to leave those on table? They are incentives not handouts. Those who enlisted at that time were also promised free medical for life. How has that worked out?
For the last three decades I worked in an industry that has a history of bankruptcys and furloughs, no matter how robust the airline was. In any case, that was not the discussion in the essay, if you actually read it you would know that.
But I guess you still feel qualified to comment tho…. so good on ya!
I don’t know think anyone is talking about the military.
Jeez
Spot on 👍👍👍
Ky Holland has been at the public trough for years. I would put no credence in his remarks.
Kevin, I would be very careful how much credit I pass to Slick Willy – when he was adhering to Reagan’s economic policies (the 13th & 14th years of Reaganomics) he did well, as you have noted. But as soon as he and his fellow demrats realized they were balancing the budget and paying down national debt they went on a social spending spree that has resulted in what we have today – where the interest on that debt exceeds our GDP. Trump and Musk are doing what MUST be done, and are minimizing pain in so doing.
Yep – Clinton’s early years rode the momentum of Reagan’s policies. The tax cuts, deregulation, and pro-growth mindset of the ‘80s were still fueling the economy well into the ‘90s. Clinton, to his credit, didn’t derail it right away. Balanced budgets, shrinking debt, even a surplus by ’98—that’s what happens when government holds the line on spending and keeps its hands out of the economy. Like I said, a strong economy isn’t built on bureaucracy; it’s built when government steps back and keeps the books in order. Reagan set the table, and Clinton got to enjoy the meal—for a while.
But you’re absolutely right about what happened next. The moment Democrats caught a whiff of fiscal sanity, they couldn’t help themselves. Spending exploded, entitlement programs ballooned, and by the late ‘90s, they were already planting the seeds for today’s fiscal disaster. Fast forward a few decades, through the Bush spending spree, and here we are—$35 trillion in debt, with interest payments now outpacing GDP growth. That’s certainly not Reaganomics at work. It’s what happens when you let the left run wild with the checkbook.
Trump and Musk understand what’s at stake. If we don’t cut the fat now, the whole system collapses under its own weight. Our current debt service is higher than defense spending. That is the historical sign of a failing dynasty or society.
Trump’s push for government efficiency (DOGE) and Musk’s relentless focus on cost-cutting are exactly the kind of thinking we need. Check out Bret Baier’s recent interview with Musk. The reality is, this won’t be painless—we’ve let the problem fester for too long. But a lean, accountable government that serves the people instead of sinking them? That’s the goal. My focus on Slick-Willy was more about the job cuts and RIF of the federal work force. Clinton proved the model works when you stick to the script; Trump and Musk are rewriting it for an era drowning in debt.
Then how do you justify the fact that the tax cuts Trump wants to make permanent would add 6-7 trillion to that debt?
you missed three entire wars and an economic collapse after 2001. history isn’t a convenient recalling of “facts”, its reality. read any of Kevin Phillips books, see what he said would happen.
history will not be kind to this current populist movement, manipulated by tech bro media platforms
Because McCabe is a RINO NeoCon UniParty member.
Supports Canada Free Trade tariffs over Trump Fair Trade.
That’s why.