Crystal Lake McHenry County Board member Terri Greeno, a Republican, disagreed with the critique by Crystal Lake Board member John Collins, a Democrat, of McHenry Township’s Tim Beck’s column.
Now, Collins has supplied a rebuttal to Greeno, which appears below:
Rebuttal to “Setting the Record Straight” on Conservative Principles
While the recent editorial defending conservative principles tries to polish the image of fiscal responsibility and local control, the reality remains much more complicated — and far less flattering.
Fiscal Responsibility and Sustainable Spending
The claim that conservatives simply want to “make tough choices” to ensure programs like Social Security and Medicare survive is misleading. The track record shows repeated efforts to cut, privatize, or weaken these programs under the banner of “sustainability.”
Conservatives didn’t champion Social Security or Medicare when they were created — they resisted them.
And now, under the guise of “saving” them, many still promote raising retirement ages, privatizing benefits, or means-testing into oblivion, steps that would undermine their core strength: universality and stability.
Defending the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)
The editorial treats DOGE as an apolitical, benevolent guardian of taxpayer dollars. But selective “efficiency” efforts that disproportionately target social programs while turning a blind eye to corporate welfare, bloated defense spending, and tax loopholes reveal a clear ideological bias.
Saving $500 million sounds impressive — until you realize that it’s pennies against the trillions that flow unquestioned to special interests, tax breaks for the wealthiest, and no-bid contracts. Efficiency should be universal — not a pretext for dismantling services ordinary Americans rely on.
Debt and Deficits: A Shared Responsibility
Both parties have contributed to the debt — true. But blaming Democrats for “government spending” ignores the GOP’s role in exploding the debt through unpaid-for tax cuts that overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy.
Fiscal responsibility isn’t just about cutting services for working families — it’s about responsibly funding the commitments we make.
The current conservative model pushes deficits higher through trickle-down economics that has been discredited time and again. Growth fueled by inequality is not real prosperity.
Local Control Over Education
“Local control” sounds appealing until you realize it’s often used to justify funding inequities, widen opportunity gaps, and dismantle national standards that protect vulnerable students.
Yes, flexibility matters — but federal involvement exists because education is a national interest. An economy built on 21st-century skills can’t afford 19th-century localism.
Encouraging Self-Reliance
No one disputes that safety nets should empower people to succeed. But conservatives consistently frame assistance as “dependency,” ignoring the structural barriers that leave millions underpaid, underemployed, and facing rising costs for housing, healthcare, and education.
The real dependency problem isn’t the single mother receiving SNAP benefits — it’s corporations dependent on taxpayer subsidies and broken tax codes.
Reforming Retirement Benefits
Telling seniors that their benefits must be “reformed” through delayed retirement, privatization, or welfare-model restructuring breaks the fundamental promise of Social Security: that after a lifetime of work and paying in, you have earned dignity and security.
Sustainability is important — but real solutions involve strengthening the program by asking the wealthiest to pay the same percentage as everyone else, not shifting the burden onto retirees.
Conclusion
The editorial paints a polished version of conservatism: disciplined, compassionate, opportunity-driven.
The lived reality for millions tells a different story:
- Cuts disguised as “sustainability.”
- Austerity for the working class, tax windfalls for the wealthy.
- “Efficiency” that only trims programs for the vulnerable.
- “Local control” used to justify systemic inequities.
The American Dream doesn’t shrink when we invest in each other. It shrinks when opportunity becomes a gated community reserved for the privileged few.
If we want a truly sustainable future, we need a government that works for everyone — not just for those who already have the most.
