I woke up on January 2 and saw that our representative, Tom McClintock, voted against the deal that averted the so-called "fiscal cliff." If this legislation would not have passed, taxes on all Americans would have gone up and most economists say that no action would have resulted in a major setback for the economy.

I am sure that Mr. McClintock would argue that the bill didn't have any spending cuts. Then I looked up last years vote on the Budget Control Act that cut spending by $917 billion over 10 years and saw that Mr. McClintock was one of only 22 Republicans to vote against this bill. No doubt he would argue that he didn't want to raise the debt ceiling, even if this means defaulting on our loans.

It has become clear to me that Mr. McClintock is against any funding bill that would keep the US government running to pursue a goal of smaller government. He is free to make that argument, but I would argue that these votes were irresponsible.

Proponents of smaller government should work toward an efficient government, but it appears that Mr. McClintock would just as well see the US government and economy fail.

Tom Fleagle

Tahoma