You rejected funding for FEMA and TSA. YOU did that.

Let’s simplify this. You were offered a clear off-ramp to resolve the TSA crisis—funding for security operations and disaster response—and you refused it. You rejected resources for both the Transportation Security Administration and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. That was not a complex policy dilemma. It was a choice. And choices have consequences. When airport lines stall, when security gaps widen, when emergency response falters—those outcomes are not abstract failures of “the system.” They trace directly back to your decision to walk away from a solution that was in front of you. You do not get to engineer dysfunction and then feign surprise at the result. You do not get to reject funding, stall agencies, and then shift blame when the predictable happens. This is governance, not performance. Refusing to act is still an action—and in this case, it is the one driving the crisis. So yes, when you are handed a way to fix a problem and you deliberately refuse it, the fallout is yours. Not shared. Not diluted. Yours. If you want less accountability, make fewer decisions that create avoidable damage. Until then, own the consequences.